5 cumulative impact analysis 5.1 cumulative impact …

5 Cumulative Impact Analysis

San Diego Forward: The 2021 Regional Plan Page 5-1

Program Environmental Impact Report

5 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS

This chapter discusses the cumulative effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects and

the contribution of regional growth and land use change and transportation network improvements and

programs included in the proposed Plan to these effects. The CEQA Guidelines define a cumulative impact as

one in which two or more individual effects, when considered together, are considerable or can compound or

increase other environmental impacts. Individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a

number of separate projects. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment

that results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and

reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but

collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time (CEQA Guidelines Section 15355).

5.1 CUMULATIVE IMPACT METHODOLOGY

CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 describes the requirements for the discussion of cumulative impacts in an EIR,

and states that an EIR will discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental effect is

cumulatively considerable. The discussion must reflect the severity of impacts and their likelihood of

occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as much detail as is provided for the impacts attributable to

the project alone. In addition, the CEQA Guidelines allow for a project’s contribution to be rendered less than

cumulatively considerable with implementation of appropriate mitigation.

According to Section 15130(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, cumulative impact analysis may be conducted

using one of two methods: the List Method, which includes “a list of past, present, and probable activities

producing related or cumulative impacts,” or the Plan Method, which uses “a summary of projections contained

in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document which has

been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions contributing to the

cumulative impact.” For the purposes of this EIR, a combination of both methods is used for the cumulative

analysis, as described below.

To analyze the cumulative effects of regional growth and land use and transportation network improvements

and programs included in the proposed Plan per CEQA requirements, the following approach for each resource

topic was applied:

1. Summarize the impacts of regional growth and land use change and transportation network improvements

included in the proposed Plan on the resource.

2. Summarize projected impacts in related plans and impacts of probable future projects within the

geographic scope of the cumulative impact analysis.

3. Discuss combined impacts and conclude whether cumulative impacts are significant, then explain whether

the proposed Plan’s incremental contribution to any significant cumulative impacts is cumulatively

considerable and therefore significant.

4. Where the incremental contribution to a significant cumulative impact is cumulatively considerable, list

mitigation measures that would reduce the incremental effects and determine whether they would make

the impact less than significant. If none exist, conclude that the contribution to the cumulative impact

remains significant and unavoidable.




5.1.1 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS

Several existing and probable future large-scale projects in the San Diego region are forecast to occur within

the 2050 timeframe of the proposed Plan and could contribute to significant cumulative impacts . Past projects

include those that have been recently completed but were not necessarily considered in the baseline for the

proposed Plan and have ongoing impacts with the potential to combine with the impacts of other projects.

Present and probable future projects include those that are under construction, in a preconstruction phase, or

show a level of assurance that the project will move forward, such as allocated funding or movement through

the necessary planning process for project approval. These projects have independent utility from the

proposed Plan, and do not rely on it for their justification. Some of these projects span beyond the boundaries

of the San Diego region, have uncertain funding, and/or have no preliminary designs. These projects are

described below.

California High-Speed Rail LA-SD Segment

The California High-Speed Rail Authority (HSRA) has developed plans for an 800-mile system that includes

nine corridors connecting California’s major metropolitan areas. Trains would reach speeds in excess of 200

miles per hour (mph) in more rural areas on a dedicated, fully grade-separated system, making it possible to

travel from San Diego to Los Angeles in less than 80 minutes and San Diego to San Francisco in less than 4

hours. Figure 5-1 depicts a statewide map of the California High Speed Rail Train (HST) project, as well as four

options for the San Diego region.

The High Speed Rail project has independent utility and is not a component of the proposed Plan. Responsibility

for the HST belongs to HSRA; SANDAG does not have authority over the alignment, design, or funding of the

HST.

The high-speed corridor serving the San Diego region runs from southwest Riverside County along the

Interstate (I-) 15 corridor, with a key intermodal transit station planned in the City of Escondido. The Los

Angeles-San Diego route is currently in Stage 2 of Planning, that is, the Alternatives Analysis. A proposed

schedule for implementation is not available and timing could depend on funding (HSRA 2014).

Navy Old Town Campus Revitalization

The United States (U.S.) Department of the Navy (Navy) prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of the proposed modernization of Naval Base Point

Loma Old Town Campus (OTC), San Diego, California. OTC is home to the Naval Information Warfare Systems

Command (NAVWAR) (Navy 2021). The Navy analyzed five alternatives, and identified Alternative 4 – high

density development with a transit center – as its preferred alternative. This transit center could be the Central

Mobility Hub, which is included as a part of the proposed Plan.

The proposed modernization of NAVWAR’s facilities on OTC would include demolition, construction, and

renovation of buildings, utilities, and infrastructure. Modernization would be accomplished in either of two

ways:

1. Navy Redevelopment: A Navy-only project that would construct new or renovate existing NAVWAR

facilities at OTC. No public-private or mixed-use development would occur on OTC under this scenario.

2. Public-private Redevelopment: Collaboration between the Navy, the private sector, and possibly other

government agencies to finance and construct new NAVWAR facilities at OTC. Development would include




new facilities for NAVWAR and a range of private mixed-use development (e.g., residential, office, retail,

hotel). The developers of the mixed-use development would pay for construction of NAVWAR facilities in

exchange for the opportunity to develop the remaining OTC land. Two of the action alternatives analyzed

in this EIS include consolidation of a transit center to OTC.

San Diego

San Marcos

Santee

Solana Beach

Vista

Carlsbad

Chula Vista

Coronado

Del Mar

El Cajon

Encinitas

Escondido

ImperialBeach

LaMesa

NationalCity

Oceanside

Poway

San Diego

Camp Pendleton

PalaReservation

Pauma and YuimaReservation

La JollaReservation

San PasqualReservation

BaronaReservation

Capitan GrandeReservation

SycuanReservation

Jamul IndianVillage

UNITED STATES

MEXICO

Tijuana, B.C.

County of San Diego

RinconReservation

LemonGrove

0 2.5 5MILES

0 4 8KILOMETERS

Proposed HSR StationHSR Alignments - Phase 1HSR Alignments - Phase 2

San Francisco

Millbrae SFO

San Jose

Gilroy Merced

Fresno

King/Tulare Regional

Palmdale

Sacramento

Stockton

Modesto

San DiegoEscondido

Riverside

Corona

East San Gabrie

l Valle

y

Ontario Airp

ort

San Bernardino

Bakersfield

Madera

Murrieta

Los Angeles

Norwalk

AnaheimFulle

rton

Burbank

Planned CaliforniaHigh-Speed TrainOverview

Figure 5-1

Source: California High-Speed Rail (HSR) Authority

Statewide Overview

Two alignment options are currentlyunder consideration by the California

High Speed Rail Authority:University City/LOSSAN and SR 163


San Diego Forward: The 2021 Regional Plan -5


Air Transportation

San Diego County International Airport Development Plan

Each year, more than 1,81725 million air passengers use the San Diego International Airport (SDIA).

The air cargo capacity at SDIA is currently constrained by limited infrastructure. To maximize the airport’s

operational efficiency and make the most of the airport’s 661-acre footprint, SDIA is moving forward with its

next master planning phase, the Airport Development Plan (ADP). The ADP provides a development framework

to implement improvements that will enable the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (SDCRAA) to

accommodate future demand for air travel that is anticipated to occur at SDIA with more modern, efficient, and

comfortable facilities. The ADP is considered a probable future project for the cumulative impact analysis.

The primary components of the project are the replacement of the existing Terminal 1, modifications to

Terminal 2, a new administration building, and a new airport access roadway with new bicycle and pedestrian

infrastructure. As part of the Terminal 1 replacement, a new access road and parking structure would also be

constructed. Other improvements include infrastructure upgrades and the removal/relocation of other airport

support facilities to accommodate the terminal improvements. Ultimately, the number of gates at SDIA would

increase from 51 to 621 (SDCRAA 2019a).

City of San Diego Pure Water North City Project

The City of San Diego is implementing the North City Project, which is the first phase of the Pure Water San

Diego Program (Pure Water Program). It involves the production of 30 million gallons per day (MGD) of

purified water. The North City Project will expand the existing North City Water Reclamation Plant (NCWRP)

and construct an adjacent North City Pure Water Facility (City of San Diego 2018). Two alternative purified

water pipelines are considered: one to Miramar Reservoir and one to San Vicente Reservoir. Other project

components include a new pump station and forcemain to deliver additional wastewater to the NCWRP, a

brine/centrate discharge pipeline, upgrades to the existing Metro Biosolids Center, a new North City

Renewable Energy Facility at the NCWRP, and a new Landfill Gas (LFG) Pipeline between the Miramar Landfill

gas collection system and the NCWRP.

The North City Project includes a variety of facilities located throughout the central coastal areas of San Diego

County in the North City geographic area. A new pure water facility and three pump stations would be located

within the corporate boundaries of the City of San Diego. Proposed alternative pipelines would traverse a

number of local jurisdictions, including the cities of San Diego and Santee, and the community of Lakeside and

other areas in unincorporated San Diego County. The proposed LFG Pipeline would traverse federal lands

within Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Miramar.

South County Traffic Relief Effort Project

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), in partnership with the Foothill/Eastern

Transportation Corridor Agency, is planning to extend Los Patrones Parkway from Cow Camp Road to Avenida

La Pata, in Orange County. This project replaces the former SR 241 Tesoro Extension project that would have

extended the current 241 Toll Road from where it now ends at Oso Parkway to Cow Camp Road in the vicinity

of Ortega Highway within Orange County. An addendum to Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) 589

(Ranch Plan), which was certified on November 6, 2001, FEIR 584 (SSNCCP/MSAA/HCP), which was certified

on October 24, 2006, and FEIR 575 (Prima Deshecha General Development Plan), which was certified on




November 8, 2004, was prepared for this project and a Notice of Determination was filed by the Orange County

Public Works Department on January 12, 2021.

Port/Maritime

Currently, the Unified Port District of San Diego (Port) is in the process of updating their long-range integrated

master plan, known as the Port Master Plan Update (PMPU), that provides the official goals and planning

policies, and identifies permissible land and water uses, for development and conservation of the Port lands,

tidelands, and submerged lands through the next 30 years (2050) for seven out of the ten planning districts

within the PMPU area. The PMPU identifies planned improvements, including appealable and non-appealable

development, for each planning district and would include the addition of new hotel and retail space as well as

improvements to the public access and recreational resources, and in-water features such as additional

recreational boat berthing space. A revised Draft PMPU was released for public review from October 20, 2020,

through November 17, 2020, and a program EIR is currently being prepared with an anticipated public review

period in late 2021 (Port 2021).

The three planning districts not being updated as part of the PMPU are Planning District 5: National City

Bayfront, Planning District 6: Chula Vista Bayfront, and the Pone 20 portion of Planning District 7: South Bay.

These planning districts have undergone, or are currently undergoing, separate planning processes with their

own environmental review. The National City Bayfront is currently being planned under the National City

Bayfront Projects & Port Master Plan program with the EIR public review period anticipated for late 2021. The

Chula Vista Bayfront has an approved land use plan for the entire planning district that is currently under

implementation, and no changes are proposed to that land use plan. The Final EIR for the Chula Vista Bayfront

project was certified in April 2010. In addition, the District-owned property in the southern portion of Pond 20

and adjacent parcels were evaluated under the Wetland Mitigation Bank at Pond 20 Project EIR and Port Master

Plan Amendment for the creation of a wetland mitigation bank and to incorporate the property into the Port

Master Plan, which was certified by the Board of Port Commissioners on April 13, 2021, and is currently

planned to be presented before the Coastal Commission for approval.

In addition, in 2016, the Port adopted a redevelopment plan for the Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal, which

would involve a variety of infrastructure investments that may be undertaken over the long term to

accommodate an increase of the marine terminal’s capabilities and capacity. These include up to five gantry

cranes, additional and consolidated dry bulk storage capacity (which may include a new 100,000-square-foot

dry bulk structure or an equivalent vertical storage facility), enhancements to the existing conveyor system,

demolition of the molasses tanks and Warehouse C, additional open storage space, establishment of an on-dock

rail facility, a centralized gate facility, and the Demolition and Initial Rail Component. The Final EIR for this

project was certified on December 13, 2016 (Port 2016).

Other Probable Future Projects

For some resource topic areas, additional large-scale probable future projects are also considered in the

cumulative impact analysis. For example, for cumulative aesthetics and visual resources impacts, impacts of

future long linear projects such as rail pipeline or energy transmission infrastructure are considered.

5.1.2 REGIONAL PLANNING DOCUMENTS

This analysis considers documents, studies, and plans that have been produced by various agencies and

organizations describing or evaluating conditions contributing to cumulative impacts. For some of these




documents, EIRs or EISs have been prepared that describe environmental impacts of plan implementation.

Available information in adopted plans or certified environmental documents is used to describe existing and

future conditions that may contribute to cumulative impacts. In some cases planning documents are included

that have been prepared by local jurisdictions, including cities and other agencies that have applicability to

planning efforts or other topic areas throughout the region, such as local general plans and their various

elements, resource protection ordinances, and climate action plans. In some cases, the impacts of local plans

are already addressed and accounted for in SANDAG and Southern California Association of Governments

(SCAG) EIRs.

Documents that have application across multiple resource topics are listed below; additional planning

documents are referenced when used within a specific resource topic analysis.

• Southern California Association of Governments: 2020-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable

Communities Strategy (SCAG 2020a)

• California Air Resources Board: California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB 2017)

• California Department of Transportation: California-Baja California Border Master Plan (Caltrans 2021)

• Unified Port of San Diego: San Diego Unified Port District Master Plan (Port 2020)

• San Diego County Regional Airport Authority: Regional Aviation Strategic Plan (RASP) (SDCRAA 2011b)

• San Diego International Airport: Airport Master Plan (SDCRAA 2008); Aviation Activity Forecasts (SDCRAA

2019b)

• SANDAG: San Diego Airport Multimodal Accessibility Plan (SANDAG 2012); 2050 Regional Transportation

Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) (SANDAG 2011a) and associated EIR (SANDAG

2011b); 2050 Goods Movement Strategy (incorporated in SANDAG 2011a)

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: The U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Program: Border 2025 (EPA

2021)

• United States Marine Corps: MCB Camp Pendleton Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (MCB

Camp Pendleton 2017); MCAS Miramar Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (MCAS Miramar

2018)

• Bureau of Land Management: Eastern San Diego County Resource Management Plan (BLM 2007)

• United States Department of Agriculture: Cleveland National Forest Plan (USDA 2006)

• 2034 Tijuana, Tecate, and Playas de Rosarito Metropolitan Strategic Plan (IMPLAN 2013)

• San Diego County Water Authority 2013 Regional Water Facilities Optimization and Master Plan Update

(SDCWA 2014)

• San Diego Gas & Electric Company 2012 Long-Term Procurement Plan (SDG&E 2012)

5.1.3 GROWTH PROJECTIONS

This analysis considers population projections gathered from a variety of sources, in addition to the projections

contained in adopted plans, to understand and characterize the cumulative setting. Population projections

include:

• SANDAG Series 14 Regional Growth Forecast used as the basis for proposed Plan




• SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS Growth Forecast

• California Department of Finance Population Projections (DOF 2019)

• 2021 Border Master Plan

Population projections from these sources are provided in Table 5-1 for the 2025, 2035, and 2050 horizon

years.

Table 5-1 Growth Projections Considered in the Cumulative Impacts Analysis

Region

Population

2016 2025 2035 2050

SANDAG 3,309,510 3,470,848 3,620,348 3,746,073

SCAG region 18,832,000 19,432,587 21,443,000 20,179,646

Northern Baja 3,484,150 4,169,240 5,357,1222 5,617,7742

State of California 39,254,339 40,808,001 42,718,403 44,049,015

Sources: SANDAG = SANDAG Series 14 Regional Growth Forecast (SANDAG 2021); SCAG = SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Demographics and Growth Forecast (for 2016, 2035), (SCAG 2020a); DOF 2021 for 2025 and 2050; Northern Baja = 2021 Border Master Plan (2021); SANDAG 2015; State of California = California Department of Finance (DOF 2021). Note: Northern Baja California generally includes the municipalities of Tijuana, Tecate, Playas de Rosarito, parts of Mexicali, and Ensenada.

5.1.4 GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE

The geographic scope defines the area in which the impacts of the proposed Plan are analyzed in combination

with similar impacts of cumulative projects or impacts associated with approved planning documents to

determine if cumulative impacts would occur. For the purposes of this EIR, the geographic scope for cumulative

impacts analysis is shown in Table 5-2. The cumulative impact analysis section for each resource topic area

explains why the specific geographic scope was selected.

Table 5-2 Topic Specific Geographic Scope of Cumulative Impacts

Cumulative Impact Topic Geographic Scope

Aesthetics and Visual Resources Southern California/Northern Baja California

Agricultural and Forestry Resources California

Air Quality Southern California/Northern Baja California

Biological Resources Southern California/Northern Baja California

Cultural and Paleontological Resources Southern California/Northern Baja California

Energy Southern California/Northern Baja California

Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources Southern California/Northern Baja California

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Global

Hazards Southern California/Northern Baja California

Hydrology and Water Quality Southern California/Northern Baja California

Land Use Southern California

Noise and Vibration Southern California/Northern Baja California




Cumulative Impact Topic Geographic Scope

Population and Housing Southern California/Northern Baja California

Public Services and Utilities Southern California/Northern Baja California

Transportation Southern California/Northern Baja California

Water Supply State of California/Lower Colorado River Basin/ Northern Baja California

Note: Southern California generally includes the areas encompassed by SANDAG and SCAG jurisdictions. SCAG represents six Southern California counties (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura) over an area covering more than 38,000 square miles. Northern Baja California generally includes the municipalities of Tijuana, Tecate, Playas de Rosarito, parts of Mexicali, and Ensenada.

5.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS

5.2.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES

C-AES-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

AESTHETIC AND VISUAL RESOURCES

The area of geographic consideration for cumulative impacts on aesthetics and visual resources is the Southern

California and northern Baja region. While diverse, this region contains a similar variety of viewsheds,

landscapes, and visual character. Aesthetic effects extend across jurisdictional boundaries and can potentially

have wide-ranging impacts. Northern Baja is appropriate to include as there are expansive views of the

southern San Diego region from higher elevations throughout Tijuana.

A hybrid approach for the cumulative analysis of aesthetics and visual resources allows for the discussion of

visual change associated with general patterns of regional urbanization, growth, and land use change while also

incorporating more precise visual effects caused by specific major development and infrastructure projects.

The cumulative impact is the combination of the impacts of the proposed Plan, aesthetic impact projections in

adopted plans, and impacts on aesthetics and visual resources resulting from large-scale existing and probable

future projects. Significant cumulative impacts related to aesthetics and visual resources would occur if there

were a substantial cumulative impact on scenic vistas, scenic resources, or degradation of the character of an

area, including the addition of visual elements of urban character to an existing rural or open space area or by

creating substantial new sources of light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views.

This cumulative impact assessment considers and relies on the impact analysis within this EIR for the proposed

Plan and SCAG’s 2020–2045 RTP/SCS Final EIR (SCAG 2020b) for the Southern California region including Los

Angeles, Orange County, Riverside, and San Bernardino County. The 2020–2045 SCAG RTP/SCS planning

horizon is 2045; thus, the analysis does not account for the plan’s year 2050 impacts. There are no regional

plans pertaining to aesthetics and visual resources for the northern Baja California region, except for the 2021

Border Master Plan, which provides a general land use description of the U.S/Mexico border region (Caltrans

2021).

Impacts of the Proposed Plan

The analysis within this EIR concludes that development associated with regional growth and transportation

network improvements would result in new infrastructure and development that would interrupt or detract

from a scenic vista, block panoramic views, or views of significant landscape features or landforms (Impact

AES-1). Additionally, new development and infrastructure would occur near scenic resources, including

historic buildings and scenic rock outcroppings, and could damage these scenic resources (Impact AES-2).




Implementation of the proposed Plan would also result in land use changes and the construction of

transportation network improvements that would substantially degrade the character of an area, including

adding a visual element of urban character to an existing rural or open space area and the addition of new light

and glare sources (Impacts AES-3 and AES-4, respectively). These visual impacts would occur within each

horizon year analyzed (2025, 2035, and 2050). Therefore, these impacts related to aesthetics and visual

resources as a result of the proposed Plan are significant.

Impacts of Related Projects

The Southern California and northern Baja region is an area of abundant and varied scenic resources. The

topography, panoramic views, scenic roadways, open spaces, and significant landscape features found

throughout this region contribute greatly to the overall character and quality of the existing visual setting.

Projects planned in the Southern California and northern Baja region, such as the Navy OTC Revitalization

Project, SDIA Airport Development Plan, HST, border/Port of Entry (POE) facility improvements,

port/maritime improvements associated with the PMPU, or long linear projects such as rail pipeline or energy

transmission infrastructure, would result in impacts related to blocking panoramic views or views of significant

landscape features or landforms, and/or result in degradation of visual character and the addition of new light

and glare sources. For example, the HST project in the San Diego region would result in bridges or elevated

guideways or other features that may introduce visual contracts that could block existing views or result in

shadow impacts (HSRA 2005). The EIR/EIS prepared for the HST project determined that the project would

result in significant cumulative impacts on aesthetic and visual resources. The EIR for the SDIA Airport

Development Plan identified aesthetic impacts, but found them to be less than significant (SDCRAA 2019).

The EIS for the Navy OTC Revitalization Project evaluated several alternatives and determined that the project

would result in significant impacts on aesthetics and visual resources associated with the construction of new

facilities for NAVWAR along with private mixed-use development with buildings up to 240 feet tall. The SCAG

2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR analyzed project environmental effects of the proposed Plan in the Southern

California region. The EIR found potential aesthetic impacts on scenic vistas, scenic resources, and light or glare

to be significant and unavoidable. Thus, some of these related projects would have adverse effects on aesthetic

and visual resources in the San Diego region in 2025, 2035, and 2050.

Impact Projections in Adopted Plans

The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR identified significant impacts on visual resources. By increasing mobility

and including land-use-transportation measures that influence the pattern of future development, the 2020-

2045 RTP/SCS would obstruct views of scenic resources or scenic vistas; alter the appearance of scenic

resources along or near designated scenic highways and vista points; create significant contrasts with the

overall visual character of the existing landscape setting or add urban visual elements to an existing natural,

rural, and open space area; and result in shade/shadow or light and glare impacts. At the regional scale, the

2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR identified cumulatively significant impacts on the overall visual character of the

existing landscape setting (SCAG 2020b).

Adopted land use plans and ordinances for local jurisdictions in Southern California would support the

construction of new development and redevelopment through policy changes, general plan updates, and zoning

amendments that encourage and facilitate growth and land use changes. As outlined for local jurisdictions in

the San Diego region in Table 4.1-3, visual resource protection ordinances often exist at the local level, and local

land use plans often contain policies related to design guidelines and review. All discretionary projects would




be subject to these local visual resource protection ordinances, design guidelines, and building

requirements/restrictions.

Cumulative Impacts and Impact Conclusions

2025

A significant cumulative impact in the year 2025 would result if the combined impacts of the proposed Plan,

the related projects, and impact projections from adopted plans within the Southern California and northern

Baja region were significant when considered together, even if not independently significant. The forecasted

regional growth and land use changes, coupled with the transportation network improvements included in the

proposed Plan for 2025 would result in significant impacts related to aesthetic and visual resources through

substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas, damage to scenic resources within a state scenic highway, and

degradation of visual character of an area. The introduction of new light sources that would affect dark skies

would also be significant.

In addition, significant aesthetic and visual impacts were also identified in the HST project environmental

analysis and in the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR. The Port, SDCRAA, and Navy projects would also have

adverse aesthetic and visual impacts, such as future POE projects, airport, and maritime improvements

associated with Port for All. Therefore, the combination of the direct and cumulative aesthetic and visual

resource–related impacts from these projects and SCAG’s adopted 2020-2045 RTP/SCS that would affect the

Southern California and northern Baja region would result in significant cumulative aesthetic and visual

impacts, based on Impact AES-1 regarding scenic vistas, Impact AES-2 regarding scenic resources within a state

scenic highway, Impact AES-3 regarding substantial degradation of the visual character of an area by 2025, and

Impact AES-4 regarding light and glare impacts.

Because cumulative aesthetic and visual resource impacts throughout the Southern California and northern

Baja region by 2025 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental aesthetic and visual

resource impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental aesthetic and visual resource impacts are

also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-AES-1).

2035

The cumulative analysis presented above for year 2025 would be applicable to year 2035, and significant

impacts on aesthetic and visual resources are anticipated. By 2035, increases in regional growth, land use

changes, and the number of transportation network improvements implemented over those that occurred by

2025 would result in additional adverse impacts on panoramic views, views of significant landscape features,

scenic highways, visual character, and light and glare. The combination of the direct and cumulative aesthetic

and visual resource–related impacts from the projects and adopted plans described above that would affect the

Southern California and northern Baja region would result in significant cumulative aesthetic and visual

impacts, based on Impact AES-1 regarding scenic vistas, Impact AES-2 regarding scenic resources within a state

scenic highway, Impact AES-3 regarding substantial degradation of the visual character of an area by 2035, and

AEA-4 regarding light and glare impacts.




also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-AES-1).




2050

The cumulative analysis presented above for years 2025 and 2035 would be applicable to year 2050, and

significant impacts on aesthetic and visual resources would occur. By 2050, increases in regional growth, land

use changes, and the number of transportation network improvements implemented over those that occurred

by 2025 and 2035 would result in additional opportunities for adverse impacts on panoramic views, views of

significant landscape features, scenic highways, visual character, and light and glare to occur. The 2050 time

period is beyond the planning horizon of the adopted SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. However, with long-term

growth and development throughout the region, similar land use impacts would likely continue throughout the

region. The combination of the direct and cumulative aesthetic and visual resource–related impacts from the

projects and adopted plans described above that would affect the Southern California and northern Baja region

would result in significant cumulative aesthetic and visual impacts, based on Impact AES-1 regarding scenic

vistas, Impact AES-2 regarding scenic resources within a state scenic highway, Impact AES-3 regarding

substantial degradation of the visual character of an area by 2050, and AES-4 regarding light and glare impacts.




also cumulatively considerable (Impact-C-AES-1).

Mitigation Measures

C-AES-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

AESTHETIC AND VISUAL RESOURCES

2025, 2035, and 2050

Mitigation measures to reduce aesthetic and visual resource impacts due to implementation of the proposed

Plan as identified in Section 4.1 would be applicable to cumulative aesthetic and visual resource impacts as

well.

Implementation of mitigation measures AES-1a, AES-1b, AES-2a, AES-2b, AES-3a, AES-3b, AES-4a and AES-

4b would reduce significant impacts on scenic vistas, scenic resources within a state scenic highway,

degradation of the visual character of an area, and light and glare. For each future project requiring mitigation

(i.e., measures that go beyond what is required by existing regulations), mitigation measures such as those

listed in Section 4.1 would help to reduce significant project-level visual resources impacts to less than

significant, or the project’s incremental impacts would remain significant and unavoidable where no feasible

mitigation exists. However, the degree of future impacts and applicability, feasibility, and success of future

mitigation measures cannot be ensured for each specific future project.

Additionally, the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR includes a variety of mitigation measures aimed at providing

requirements for visual improvement of transportation facilities and other development, minimizing

construction within important viewsheds, and the development of visual development standards and

guidelines. The EIR concluded that even with the implementation of mitigation, visual impacts would remain

significant and unavoidable. Similarly, the HST environmental document includes a mitigation strategy to

minimize building and shading of bridges and elevated guideways with the use of neutral colors and materials

to blend with surrounding landscape features.




The HST EIR/EIS concluded that even with the implementation of mitigation, visual impacts would remain

significant (HSRA 2005). While proposed mitigation would lessen aesthetic impacts, impacts on aesthetics from

related projects would remain significant even with the application of mitigation.

Based on the above analysis, following mitigation of the effects of the proposed Plan, related projects, and

adopted plans, cumulative impacts on aesthetic and visual resources would remain significant. Also, mitigation

measures AES-1a, AES-1b, AES-2a, AES-2b, AES-3a, AES-3b, AES-4a and AES 4b would not reduce the

proposed Plan’s incremental impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental

contributions to cumulative aesthetic and visual resource impacts would remain cumulatively considerable

post-mitigation.

5.2.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

C-AG-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

The area of geographic consideration for cumulative impacts on agriculture and forest resources is the state of

California. Agriculture as a whole in California is important as the successful production of many crops is due

to the distinctive climates found in the state. While variable by region, the state of California supports an

extensive range of agricultural operations and opportunities.

A hybrid approach for cumulative analysis of agricultural and forest resources allows for an overarching

discussion of regional loss of agricultural lands and forest resources associated with general patterns of

regional urbanization, growth, and land use changes while also allowing for specific consideration of any

projects with known impacts on agriculture. The cumulative impact is the combination of the impacts of the

proposed Plan, agricultural and forest resources impact projections in adopted plans, and impacts on

agricultural and forest resources resulting from probable future projects. Significant cumulative impacts

related to agriculture resources would occur if there were a cumulative loss of existing agriculture resources,

including conversion of agricultural lands to nonagricultural use and conflicts with Williamson Act contracts

and lands zoned for agricultural use. Significant cumulative impacts related to forest lands would occur if there

were a cumulative loss or conversion of forest land as defined in the California Forest Legacy Act of 2007 (Public

Resources Code [PRC] Section 12220(g)).

There is an ongoing trend of decreased acres of land in agricultural production in California. The most recent

California Farmland Conversion Report (2014–2016) issued by the California Department of Conservation

found that irrigated farmland in California decreased by 11,165 acres between 2014 and 2016 (DOC 2019). In

the San Diego region, land in commercial agricultural crop production decreased from over 312,000 acres in

2008 to less than 304,000 acres in 2012 (County of San Diego 2013). In the nearby Imperial Valley, areas of

crop production served by the Imperial Irrigation District decreased from 502,039 acres in 2004 to 457,695

acres in 2013 (IID 2004, 2013).


The forecasted regional growth and land use change and planned transportation network improvements

associated with the proposed Plan would convert agricultural lands to nonagricultural use between 2016 and

2025 (6,458 acres), between 2026 and 2035 (804 acres), and between 2036 and 2050 (923 acres), for a total

of 8,186 acres cumulatively between 2016 and 2050, as detailed in Section 4.2. Implementation of the proposed




Plan would also decrease the viability of agriculture on agriculturally designated land. This would be a

significant impact on agricultural resources in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact AG-1).

Additionally, regional growth and land use change and transportation network improvements would conflict

with lands zoned for agriculture (1,167 acres between 2016 and 2025, 175 acres between 2026 and 2035, and

18 acres between 2036 and 2050, for a cumulative total between 2016 and 2050 of 1,360 acres) and lands

under Williamson Act contract (732 acres between 2016 and 2025, 120 acres between 2026 and 2035, and 1

acre between 2036 and 2050, for a cumulative total between 2016 and 2050 of 853 acres) . This would be a

significant impact on agricultural resources in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact AG-2).

Regional growth and land use change would result in new development that would result in the loss of existing

forest lands. Proposed transportation network improvements also would require ground-disturbing activities

such as brush clearing, grading, trenching, excavation, and/or soil removal that would result in the loss of forest

lands. Development associated with regional growth and land use change and transportation network

improvements together would result in a direct loss of forest land between 2016 and 2025 (1,170 acres),

between 2026 and 2035 (183 acres), and between 2036 and 2050 (13 acres), for a cumulative total between

2016 and 2050 of 1,366 acres. This would be a significant impact (Impact FR-1).


Other related regional projects, such as the HST, would have similar types of impacts as identified for the

proposed Plan transportation improvements. The programmatic environmental document for the HST

identified a potentially significant impact related to agriculture and forest resources for the segments planned

for the Southern California region. Implementation of the HST is ongoing and being conducted in phases (HSRA

2005). The EIRs for the SDIA Airport Development Plan Project and the Navy OTC Revitalization Project did

not evaluate agricultural impacts as this resource area was determined to not be significant (SCDRAA 2019a,

Navy 2021)

Other land development and infrastructure projects throughout the region and state, such as petroleum

pipeline transportation infrastructure, and freight rail infrastructure, and energy generation and transmission

corridors, would also impact agriculture and/or forest resources if these projects expand the right-of-way

(ROW) of highway or rail lines and convert agricultural uses or forest lands to other uses.

The Caltrans South County Traffic Relief Effort Project will extend Los Patrones Parkway from Cow Camp Road

to Avenida La Pata, in Orange County. This project replaces the former State Route (SR) 241 Tesoro Extension

Project that would have extended the current 241 Toll Road from where it now ends at Oso Parkway to Cow

Camp Road in the vicinity of Ortega Highway within Orange County. The environmental process for this project

is underway, but because the project would be constructed in the same corridor, it could impact similar

resources.

The SR 241 Tesoro Extension Project analyzed project environmental effects in an Addendum to the South

Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Project Final Subsequent EIR. The addendum

found the project would not result in more severe agricultural impacts than identified in the EIR, which found

significant and unavoidable agricultural impacts. The addendum stated that farmlands within and immediately

adjacent to the SR 241 Tesoro Extension Project alignment are limited to cattle grazing areas and no existing

forestry resources or zoning for forest land exists within the extension project area (Foothill/Eastern

Transportation Corridor Agency 2013).





In the Southern California region, the EIR prepared for the 2020-2045 SCAG RTP/SCS identified impacts related

to the loss of agricultural and forest lands due to new transportation infrastructure and associated land

development, particularly those constructed outside of urbanized areas where new urban uses could be located

on agricultural or forest lands. Additionally, the EIR found that the contribution of the 2020-2045 SCAG

RTP/SCS to agricultural and forest impacts would be cumulatively considerable, as the conversion of

agricultural land resulting from changes in regional land use patterns has the potential to set a precedent that

would affect areas outside the region resulting in the conversion of agricultural lands (SCAG 2021b). The 2020-

2045 SCAG RTP/SCS planning horizon is 2045. This document and analysis do not account for year 2050

impacts.

Adopted land use plans for local jurisdictions throughout the state of California may enact land pattern changes

and zoning amendments that encourage and facilitate new urban development. Some of the land use changes

would convert agriculture or forest resources to other uses. Additionally, adopted plans for improvements to

arterial networks that widen streets or add or expand transportation facilities, especially those in new or

nonurbanized areas, would also convert agriculture or forest resources to other uses.


2025



Baja region were significant when considered together, even if not independently significant. As described

above, implementation of the regional growth and land use changes and transportation network improvements

associated with the proposed Plan in 2025 would significantly impact agriculture resources through the

conversion of agricultural lands to nonagricultural use and conflicts with existing zoning agricultural uses and

Williamson Act contracts. Also, significant impacts were identified for the loss of forest land due to proposed

Plan implementation.

As discussed above, significant impacts on agriculture and forest resources have been identified in project-

specific environmental documents such as the HST project EIR/EIS and also in the environmental analysis for

adopted planning documents. Other related infrastructure projects and land use plans across the state may also

contribute to substantial impacts on agriculture and forest resources in a manner similar to the proposed Plan

through the expansion of urban uses into areas of agriculture or forest use. The combination of the direct

impacts from individual projects and adopted plans would result in significant cumulative impacts on

agriculture and forest resources throughout the state of California by 2025.

Because cumulative impacts on agriculture and forest resources throughout the state by 2025 would be

significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts on agriculture and forest resources are

significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts on agriculture and forest resources are also cumulatively

considerable in 2025 (Impact C-AG-1).

2035

Similar to the analysis for 2025, implementation of the regional growth and land use changes and

transportation network improvements associated with the proposed Plan in 2035 would significantly impact

agriculture resources through the conversion of agricultural lands to nonagricultural use and conflicts with




existing zoning agricultural uses and Williamson Act contracts. Also, significant impacts were identified for the

loss of forest land due to proposed Plan implementation.

Significant impacts on agriculture and forest resources have been identified in project-specific environmental

documents such as the HST project EIR/EIS and also in the environmental analysis for adopted planning

documents. Other associated infrastructure projects and land use plans across the state may also contribute to

substantial impacts on agriculture and forest resources in a manner similar to the proposed Plan through the

expansion of urban uses into areas of agriculture or forest use. The combination of these impacts would result

in significant cumulative impacts on agriculture and forest resources throughout the state of California by 2035.

Because cumulative impacts on agriculture and forest resources throughout the state by 2035 would be

significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts on agriculture and forest resources are

significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts on agriculture and forest resources are also cumulatively

considerable in 2035 (Impact C-AG-1).

2050

Similar to the analysis for 2025, implementation of the regional growth and land use changes and

transportation network improvements associated with the proposed Plan in 2050 would significantly impact

agriculture resources through the conversion of agricultural lands to nonagricultural use and conflicts with

existing zoning agricultural uses and Williamson Act contracts. Also, significant impacts were identified for the

loss of forest land due to proposed Plan implementation.

As noted above, significant impacts on agriculture and forest resources have been identified in project-specific

environmental documents such as the HST project EIR/EIS and also in the environmental analysis for adopted

planning documents. Other associated infrastructure projects and land use plans across the state may also

contribute to substantial impacts on agriculture and forest resources in a manner similar to the proposed Plan

through the expansion of urban uses into areas of agriculture or forest use. The combination of these impacts

would result in significant cumulative impacts on agriculture and forest resources throughout the state of

California by 2050 (Impact C-AG-1).

Mitigation Measures

C-AG-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

2025, 2035, and 2050

Mitigation measure AG-1a calls for the preservation of existing agricultural lands through avoidance when

feasible, and if not feasible, through acquisition or dedication of agricultural conservation easements (Measure

AG-1a also applies to projects that would require cancellation of a Williamson Act contract). Mitigation

measure AG-1b reduces conflicts with agricultural operations through the implementation of project design

features and mitigation measures to protect surrounding agriculture. However, there is no assurance that the

agricultural impacts of all land use changes and transportation network improvement projects implementing

the proposed Plan would be reduced to less-than-significant levels by these measures.

Mitigation measure FR-1 calls for the preservation of forest lands through avoiding conversion of forest lands

when feasible and, if not feasible, through the implementation of measures to reduce impacts on forest lands.




In addition, mitigation measures BIO-1a, BIO-1b, and BIO-1e as identified in the biological resources analysis

below would minimize impacts. However, there is no assurance that the impacts of all development and

transportation network improvement projects implementing the proposed Plan would be reduced to less-than-

significant levels by these measures.

The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR includes multiple mitigation measures to reduce impacts on agricultural

resources and farmland, including avoidance of farmlands in project design; development of regional

guidelines for farmland buffering; and establishment of programs to direct growth to less agriculturally

valuable lands, promote infill development to minimize development of agricultural lands, and conservation

easement programs to mitigate prime farmland impacts. The EIR concludes that while these mitigation

measures would reduce impacts on agricultural resources, they would not reduce impacts to a less-than-

significant level, and impacts would remain significant (SCAG 2020b).

The 2005 EIR/EIS for the HST includes a number of mitigation strategies to reduce impacts on both agriculture

resources and sensitive vegetation communities such as forest lands. The EIR concludes that impacts on

agricultural lands and biological resources would remain significant, even with the application of mitigation

strategies (HSRA 2005).

Based on the above analysis, following mitigation of the effects of the proposed Plan, related projects, and

adopted plans, cumulative impacts on agricultural and forestry resources would remain significant. Also, the

proposed mitigation measures would not reduce the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts to less than

significant. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative agricultural and forestry

resource impacts would remain cumulatively considerable post-mitigation.

5.2.3 AIR QUALITY

C-AQ-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO AIR QUALITY

Emissions of criteria air pollutants can travel substantial distances and are not confined by jurisdictional

boundaries; rather they are influenced by large-scale climatic and topographical features. Thus, the geographic

scope considered for cumulative impacts on air quality is the Southern California and northern Baja region.

A projection approach to air quality is appropriate given the air pollutant emissions resulting from the future

overall transportation network improvements, increases in population, and necessary planned regional

development.

The plans considered and relied on for this cumulative analysis include the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and its

EIR (SCAG 2020); the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) 2016 Regional Air Quality Strategy

Revision (2016 RAQS) (SDAPCD 2016a); SDAPCD 2020 San Diego Ozone State Implementation Plan (2020 SIP)

(SDAPCD 2020); SDAPCD 2016 Eight-Hour O3 Attainment Plan (2016 SIP) (SDAPCD 2016b); South Coast Air

Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) (SCAQMD 2016); Imperial

County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) Final 2009 8 Hour Ozone Modified Air Quality Management Plan

(ICAPCD 2010); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Border 2025 Program, Master Action Plan for

California-Baja California (EPA 2013); 2034 Tijuana, Tecate, and Playas de Rosarito Metropolitan Strategic Plan

(IMPLAN 2013); and California-Baja California Border Master Plan (Caltrans 2021).

Significant cumulative impacts related to air quality would occur if emissions would conflict with or obstruct

implementation of the Regional Air Quality Strategy and/or State Implementation Plan; result in a cumulatively




considerable net increase in nonattainment or attainment criteria pollutants, including VOC, NOx, PM10, PM2.5,

and SOx; result in construction-related emissions above regional mass emission thresholds; expose sensitive

receptors to substantial PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations; expose sensitive receptors to substantial TAC

concentrations; expose sensitive receptors to carbon monoxide hot spots; and result in other emissions (such

as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.


The proposed Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts related to conflicting with or obstructing the

implementation of the 2016 RAQS, 2016 SIP, and 2020 SIP , and would result in less-than-significant impacts

related to exposure of sensitive receptors to carbon monoxide hot-spots and to other emissions such as odors,

that could adversely affect a substantial number of people (Impact AQ-1). While the proposed Plan would result

in less-than-significant impacts related to a cumulatively considerable net increase in criteria pollutant

emissions in 2025 and 2035; by 2050, the proposed Plan would result in a cumulatively considerable net

increase in respirable particulate matter (PM10) and sulfur oxides (SOX) emissions (Impact AQ-2). In addition,

the proposed Plan would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to construction-related

emissions exceeding (Impact AQ-3) and exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial PM10 concentrations in

2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact AQ-4). The proposed Plan would expose new sensitive receptors to substantial

toxic air contaminant (TAC) concentrations in 2025 and 2035, while exposing certain existing sensitive

receptors, as well as new receptors, to substantial concentrations of TAC emissions in 2050 (Impact AQ-5).

The proposed Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to

carbon monoxide hot-spots (Impact AQ-6) and result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)

adversely affecting a substantial number of people (Impact AQ-7).


The 2016 RAQS states that air quality progress is occurring within San Diego County, but that current state and

federal ozone standards are not yet attained, and continued emission reduction efforts are needed. The report

states that both volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions were reduced by larger

percentages between 2007 and 2014 than were projected in the 2009 RAQS Revision, and that based on

regulatory actions already taken, total VOC and NOX emissions are expected to continue decreasing through

2035 due to ongoing implementation of existing local stationary source rules, as well as state and federal

mobile source regulations (SDAPCD 2016a).

The 2020 SIP addresses the requirements for attaining the 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone (O3) NAAQS. The 2016

SIP complies with the moderate nonattainment area classification for the planning requirements and includes

demonstrations for attainment of the 2008 O3 NAAQS by July 20, 2018 (2017 attainment year). Despite

substantial air quality progress, the region did not attain the 2008 O3 NAAQS (75 parts per billion [ppb]) by the

attainment deadline; as a result, EPA reclassified San Diego County as a serious nonattainment area for that

standard with a new attainment date of July 20, 2027 (2026 attainment year). Furthermore, the 2020 SIP

complies with the severe nonattainment area classification planning requirements and includes

demonstrations for attainment of the 2008 and 2015 O3 NAAQS by 2026 and 2032, respectively. The 2020 SIP

includes updated inventories of O3 precursor emissions (VOC and NOX) for the 2017 base year (the year from

which future-year inventories are projected) and the 2026 and 2032 attainment years (SDAPCD 2020). The

SCAQMD 2016 AQMP (SCAQMD 2016) states that the air in Southern California is far from meeting all federal

and state air quality standards. However, the long-term trend of the quality shows continuous improvement

and is the direct result of Southern California’s comprehensive, multiyear strategy of reducing air pollution

from all sources as outlined in its AQMPs. To reach federal Clean Air Act (CAA) deadlines over the next two




decades, Southern California must significantly accelerate its pollution reduction efforts. Many of the control

measures proposed in the AQMP are not regulatory in form, but instead focus on incentives, outreach, and

education to bring about emissions reductions through voluntary participation and behavioral changes needed

to complement regulations.

The ICAPCD 8-Hour Ozone Modified AQMP includes emission inventories and also outlines control measures

to address who in Imperial County controls emissions. These include the ICAPCD’s stationary source control

measures, regional transportation control measures, and state strategy, all of which provide the framework for

ICAPCD rules that reduce ROG and NOX emissions (ICAPCD 2010).

The U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Program: Border 2025 includes Goal #1 to reduce air pollution. The

plan encourages stakeholders to develop and implement projects that maximize health and environmental

benefits from multi-pollutant emissions reductions where available, including at the San Diego/Tijuana bi-

national airshed. Some examples include an improved compliance with vehicle emission standards, and

establishment of vehicle inspection and maintenance programs in order to reduce emissions in the border

region (EPA 2021).

The 2034 Tijuana, Tecate, and Playas de Rosarito Metropolitan Strategic Plan states that a critical issue for the

Baja region is the progressive deterioration of the quality of air that is associated with the number of vehicles

and no provision of sustainable transportation (IMPLAN 2013).

The California-Baja California Border Master Plan is a binational comprehensive approach to coordinate

planning and delivery of projects at land POEs and transportation infrastructure serving those POEs in the

California-Baja California region. The Master Plan does not have an associated environmental analysis

document; however, projects included in the Master Plan could have adverse air quality impacts due to

temporary construction. Nevertheless, beneficial air quality impacts would result from improved traffic

conditions and reduced vehicle idle times at POEs. The plan does identify the need for a comprehensive strategy

for border crossings that allows for effective integration of POEs into the municipal environment and that, in

addition to the POE facility itself, complementary actions related to transportation, such as air quality, should

be considered (Caltrans 2021).


2025

A cumulative impact in the year 2025 would result if the combined impacts of the proposed Plan and impact

projections from adopted plans within Southern California and northern Baja California region were significant

when considered together, even if not independently significant.

Many of the air quality plans note that air quality across the region has been improving due to implementation

of various measures and stricter emission requirements. Nevertheless, given some uncertainty that air quality

plans throughout Southern California and northern Baja would all be implemented successfully, and given that

the proposed Plan’s direct impacts are significant, cumulative air quality impacts would also be significant due

to PM10 and SOx emissions exceeding thresholds, the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial PM10

concentrations, impacts associated with construction equipment emissions, and exposure of sensitive

receptors to TACs.




Because cumulative air quality impacts throughout Southern California and northern Baja by 2025 would be

significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental air quality impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s

incremental air quality impacts are also cumulatively considerable in 2025 (Impact C-AQ-1).

2035

As described above, cumulative air quality impacts would also be significant in 2035 due to PM10 and SOx

emissions exceeding thresholds, exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial PM10 concentrations, impacts

associated with exhaust emissions from construction equipment emissions, and exposure of sensitive

receptors to TACs.




2050

As described above, cumulative air quality impacts would be significant in 2050 due to PM10 and SOx emissions

exceeding thresholds, exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial PM10 concentrations, impacts associated

with exhaust emissions from construction equipment emissions, and exposure of sensitive receptors to TACs.




Mitigation Measures

C-AQ-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO AIR QUALITY

As described in Section 4.3, the proposed Plan’s significant air quality impacts would be reduced by mitigation

measures AQ-2a, AQ-2b, AQ-3a, AQ-3b, AQ-3c, AQ-4, AQ-5a, and AQ-5b and would be further reduced by

mitigation measures GHG-5a, GHG-5b, GHG-5d, GHG-5e, GHG-5f, and TRA-2.

Similar mitigation measures are specified in other regional plans, such as the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR.

However, that EIR concluded that even with implementation of mitigation measures, some direct air quality

impacts would remain significant. Regional air quality planning documents provide short- and long-term

strategies for reducing air pollution and control measures to be implemented by applicable jurisdictions and

agencies to further reduce air pollutant emissions.

As described in Section 4.3, mitigation measures AQ-2a through AQ-5b and GHG-5a, GHG-5b, GHG-5d, GHG-

5e, GHG-5f, and TRA-2, would not reduce the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts to less than significant.

Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative air quality impacts in years 2025,

2035, and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-mitigation.




5.2.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

C-BIO-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The area of geographic consideration for cumulative impacts on biological resources is the Southern California

and northern Baja region. Biological resources have commonalities across the expanse of this region while also

having very unique and specific characteristics in certain locations. Biological resources extend beyond

jurisdictional boundaries and can be impacted by development and projects across an expansive area; thus, it

is necessary to consider the entire region to adequately include broad-reaching impacts and overall loss of

sensitive resources.

A hybrid approach to consideration of cumulative biological impacts allows for an overarching discussion of

regional loss of biological resources associated with general patterns of regional urbanization, growth, and land

use changes while also allowing for explicit consideration of individual large-scale probable future projects

with impacts on specific biological resources per their environmental analysis documents.

Information on planned residential development and land use changes in Southern California is available in

adopted land use plans for individual cities and counties. The plans considered and relied on for this cumulative

biological analysis include the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and its EIR (SCAG 2020); SANDAG Multiple Habitat

Conservation Program (MHCP) and associated EIS/EIR (SANDAG 2003); County of San Diego Multiple Species

Conservation Plan (MSCP) and associated EIR (County of San Diego 1997); San Diego County Water Authority

(SDCWA) Subregional Natural Community Conversation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) and

associated EIR/EIS (SDCWA 2010); Western Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan

(MSHCP) and associated EIR/EIS (County of Riverside 2003); Coachella Valley MSHCP and associated EIR/EIS

(Coachella Valley Association of Governments 2007); Strategic Plan of the Commission for Environmental

Cooperation 2010-2015 (Commission for Environmental Cooperation 2010); and California-Baja 2021

California Border Master Plan (Caltrans 2021).

The cumulative impact is the combination of the impacts of the proposed Plan, probable future projects, and

impact projections in adopted plans. Significant cumulative impacts related to biological resources would occur

if the land use changes and transportation network improvements associated with the proposed Plan, together

with adopted plans and associated infrastructure, would have a substantial adverse effect on any sensitive

natural vegetation community or regulated aquatic resources; have a substantial adverse effect on any

candidate, sensitive, or special-status species; interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident

or migratory fish or wildlife species; or conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other

conservation plan.


Implementation of the proposed Plan’s regional growth and land use change and transportation network

improvements would result in substantial direct and indirect adverse effects on sensitive natural communities

and regulated aquatic resources (Impact BIO-1); and species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special-status

species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife

(CDFW) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (Impact BIO-2); and has the potential to interfere

substantially with fish and wildlife movement, wildlife corridors, and nursery sites in 2025, 2035, and 2050

(Impact BIO-3). These impacts would remain significant and unavoidable even with mitigation.




The proposed Plan is designed to comply with all approved HCPs, NCCPs, other conservation plans, and local

biological protection policies and ordinances. Therefore, no conflicts would occur (Impact BIO-4). Any

encroachment into hardline preserve areas would not conflict with HCPs because biologically equivalent or

superior compensation of habitat or project redesign would be required when there is encroachment into

hardline preserve areas. Thus, the proposed Plan would result in a less-than-significant impact related to

conflicts with HCPs, NCCPs, and other conservation plans in 2025, 2035, and 2050.


One of the major infrastructure projects planned for development in Southern California is the California HST.

The possible HST routes would affect the region of Southern California from Los Angeles to San Diego.

According to the HST EIR/EIS, sufficient information is not available at the program level to conclude with

certainty that mitigation will reduce impacts on affected resources to a less-than-significant level in all

circumstances (HSRA 2005). Therefore, the EIR/EIS concludes that the “impacts to biological resources and

wetlands are considered significant at the program level even with the application of mitigation strategies.”

Additional environmental assessment for individual phases of the HST project will allow more precise

evaluation in the second-tier, project-level environmental analyses. The Navy OTC Revitalization and the City

of San Diego Pure Water North City projects concluded there would be less-than-significant impacts related to

biological resources.


According to the EIR for the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, which analyzes impacts through 2045, growth and

projects would result in a wide variety of significant and unavoidable biological impacts. While site-specific

analyses would be required to identify and minimize the impacts of each particular transportation and/or

development project, the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would substantially affect vegetation communities and

habitat, some of which are utilized by special-status species. The EIR identified the potential to contribute to a

cumulatively considerable loss of habitat and biological resources (SCAG 2020).

The MHCP is the Subregional Plan for the northwestern portion of San Diego County that encompasses 111,908

acres (29,962 acres of natural habitat) and provides conservation for 77 species in a 20,593-acre reserve. The

EIS/EIR for the MHCP concluded that, because the project has the potential to cause a fish or wildlife population

to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; and reduce the number

or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, a significant impact on some biological

resources would occur (SANDAG 2003).

The San Diego County MSCP Subregional Plan is a cooperative effort by the County of San Diego and other city

jurisdictions in southwestern San Diego County to implement a regional NCCP and HCP and contribute

collectively to the conservation of vegetation communities and species in the MSCP study area. The associated

EIR/EIR identified significant but mitigable direct and indirect impacts on biological resources (County of San

Diego 1997).

The SDCWA NCCP/HCP is a comprehensive program designed to facilitate conservation and management of

covered species and habitats associated with SDCWA activities and contribute to ongoing regional conservation

efforts. The EIR/EIS found that implementation of the NCCP/HCP would result in less-than-significant impacts

on biological resources after mitigation (SDCWA 2010).




The Western Riverside MSHCP encompasses approximately 1,966 square miles and provides for the creation

of a Conservation Area that protects and manages 500,000 acres of habitat for 146 covered species. The

associated EIR/EIS found significant and unavoidable impacts on sensitive upland communities as well as

noncovered species; however, no cumulative biological impacts were identified as the plan would preserve

sufficient acreage of the sensitive vegetation communities present in western Riverside County (County of

Riverside 2003).

The Coachella Valley MSHCP protects 240,000 acres of open space and 27 species. The associated EIR/EIS

found that effective implementation of the plan will help ensure that impacts on biological resources in the plan

area will be less than significant (Coachella Valley Association of Governments 2007).

The Strategic Plan of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation 2010-2015 includes Strategic Objective

#2, which is to increase resilience of shared ecosystems at risk. While there is no associated environmental

analysis document, the intent of the plan is to develop capacity to implement an ecosystem approach to

conservation and sustainable use and monitor relevant outcomes in internationally shared ecosystems, with

attention to both terrestrial and marine ecosystems (Commission for Environmental Cooperation 2010).



California-Baja California region (Caltrans 2008). The projects included in the Master Plan would have

construction and operational impacts that could have an adverse effect on biological resources. No detailed

analysis of biological impacts was conducted for this Master Plan.


2025



Baja region were significant when considered together, even if not independently significant. Implementation

of the proposed Plan’s regional growth and transportation network improvements and programs would have

significant impacts related to biological resources in the San Diego region by the year 2025. By 2025, the

regional growth and land use change as well as transportation network improvements would result in

substantial direct and indirect adverse effects on sensitive natural communities and regulated aquatic

resources; and species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans,

policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. the proposed Plan would also interfere substantially with

fish and wildlife movement, wildlife corridors, and nursery sites.

Some related projects such as the HST, developed in the Southern California region by 2020, or implementation

of other regional plans would also have a substantial adverse effect on sensitive natural communities, regulated

aquatic resources, and special-status species, or interfere substantially with the movement of wildlife, Thus,

the combination of the proposed Plan and continued growth and development through the rest of the Southern

California and northern Baja region would result in significant cumulative biological resource impacts.

Because cumulative biological resource impacts throughout the Southern California and northern Baja region

by 2025 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental biological resource impacts are

significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental biological resource impacts are cumulatively considerable (Impact

C-BIO-1).




The proposed Plan’s impacts related to conflicts with adopted policies of HCPs and NCCPs and other local

policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, in combination with similar impacts that would result

in the southern California and northern Baja California region based on projections in adopted plans and other

cumulative projects, would not cause a significant cumulative impact.

2035

As described in the 2025 analysis, the planned growth and projects throughout Southern California and

northern Baja region and implementation of the proposed Plan resulting in regional growth and land use

change and transportation network improvements would contribute to the cumulative loss of biological

resources due to conversion of undeveloped lands to developed lands, including direct and indirect adverse

effects on sensitive natural communities and regulated aquatic resources; and on species identified as

candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the CDFW

or USFWS; and has the potential to interfere substantially with fish and wildlife movement, wildlife corridors,

and nursery sites.

Implementation of the proposed Plan growth and transportation network improvements and programs would

have significant impacts related to biological resources in the San Diego Region by the year 2035. Land use

changes and transportation network improvements associated with both the proposed Plan and regional

projects and plans developed in Southern California and northern Baja by 2035 would allow for more

development and redevelopment to occur, and would therefore result in substantial direct and indirect adverse

effects on sensitive natural communities and regulated aquatic resources; and on species identified as

candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the CDFW

or USFWS. to the proposed Plan would also interfere substantially with fish and wildlife movement, wildlife

corridors, and nursery sites. Thus, the combination of the proposed Plan and continued growth and

development through the rest of the Southern California and northern Baja region would result in significant

cumulative biological resource impacts. Because cumulative biological resource impacts throughout the

Southern California and northern Baja region by 2035 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s

incremental biological resource impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental biological resource

impacts are cumulatively considerable (Impact C-BIO-1).

Similar to the 2025 analysis, the proposed Plan’s impacts related to conflicts with adopted policies of HCPs and

NCCPs and other local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, in combination with similar

impacts in adopted plans and other cumulative projects, would not cause a significant cumulative impact in

2035.

2050

As described in the 2025 analysis, the planned growth and projects throughout Southern California and

northern Baja region and implementation of the proposed Plan resulting in regional growth and land use

change and transportation network improvements would contribute to the cumulative loss of biological

resources as result of conversion of undeveloped lands to developed lands, including substantial direct and

indirect adverse effects on sensitive natural communities and regulated aquatic resources; and on species

identified as candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or

by the CDFW or USFWS; and has the potential to interfere substantially with fish and wildlife movement,

wildlife corridors, and nursery sites.




Implementation of the proposed Plan growth and transportation network improvements and programs would

have significant impacts related to biological resources in the San Diego Region by the year 2050. Land use

changes and transportation network improvements associated with both the proposed Plan as well as regional

projects and plans developed in Southern California and northern Baja by 2050 would allow for more

development and redevelopment to occur, and would therefore result in substantial direct and indirect adverse

effects on sensitive natural communities and regulated aquatic resources; and species identified as candidate,

sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.

The proposed Plan would also interfere substantially with fish and wildlife movement, wildlife corridors, and

nursery sites. Thus, the combination of the proposed Plan and continued growth and development through the

rest of the Southern California and northern Baja region would result significant cumulative biological resource

impacts.

Because cumulative biological resource impacts throughout the Southern California and northern Baja region

by 2050 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental biological resource impacts are

significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental biological resource impacts are cumulatively considerable (Impact

C-BIO-1).

Similar to the 2025 analysis, the proposed Plan’s impacts related to conflicts with adopted policies of HCPs and

NCCPs and other local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, in combination with similar

impacts in adopted plans and other cumulative projects, would not cause a significant cumulative impact in

2050.

Mitigation Measures

C-BIO-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1a through BIO-1e, BIO-2a through BIO-2c, and BIO-3 would

reduce direct and indirect impacts of the proposed Plan. Measures BIO-1a through BIO-1e include design and

avoidance measures to be incorporated into projects to avoid impacts on sensitive natural vegetation

communities and aquatic resources; provide compensatory mitigation when impacts are unavoidable;

implement mitigation and monitoring plans per agency requirements; prepare habitat restorations plans;

prepare habitat/long-term management plans; and implement BMPs to avoid indirect impacts. Measures BIO-

2a, through BIO-2c include design and avoidance measures to be incorporated into projects to avoid and

reduce impacts on special-status wildlife and plant species and provide compensatory mitigation. Measure

BIO-3 includes measures to provide for movement of wildlife. Some impacts on sensitive natural communities

and regulated aquatic resources; species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or

regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS; and interference with wildlife movement and

wildlife corridors remain significant and unavoidable after implementation of all applicable mitigation

measures.

Similar types of mitigation measures are provided in other regional plans, such as the SCAG 2020-2045

RTP/SCS EIR, and individual projects have project-specific biological mitigation. The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS

EIR concluded that even with implementation of mitigation, biological resource impacts would remain

significant. The HST EIR/EIS provided biological mitigation strategies, but concluded that it could not be

determined that all biological impacts would be fully mitigated to below a level of significance. Thus, there is

no assurance that the proposed mitigation would reduce impacts of related projects in Southern California and

northern Baja to a less-than-significant level.




Mitigation measures BIO-1a through BIO-3 would not reduce the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts to less

than significant. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative biological impacts in

years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-mitigation.

5.2.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

C-CULT-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

CULTURAL RESOURCES

The area of geographic consideration for cumulative impacts on cultural resources is the Southern California

and northern Baja California region. Because local and regional settlement patterns are closely linked, it is

important to evaluate the loss of cultural resources across this entire geographic area to adequately consider

how the loss of resources would impact the understanding of the closely interrelated prehistory and history of

the peoples who have inhabited the Plan Area. Historical resources should be considered based on their

importance both within their local setting and in the regional framework. A projection approach for cumulative

analysis of cultural resources allows for an overarching discussion of regional loss of interrelated cultural

resources associated with general patterns of regional urbanization, growth, and land use changes. The

cumulative impact is the combination of the impacts of the proposed Plan and impact projections in adopted

planning documents. Significant cumulative impacts related to cultural resources would occur if cumulatively

there would be a substantial increase in impacts with regard to the significance of historic or unique

archaeological resource, or disturbance of human remains.


Plan, SCAG’s Connect SoCal (2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR (SCAG 2020) for the Southern California region, the

County of San Diego General Plan Update EIR (County of San Diego 2011), and the California-Baja California

2021 Border Master Plan (Caltrans 2021). Many local jurisdictions provide guidance and protective measures

for cultural resources in their general plans and other local planning documents. There are generally no

regional plans pertaining to such resources for the northern Baja California region. The California-Baja

California Border Master Plan is a binational comprehensive approach to coordinate planning and delivery of

projects at land POEs and transportation infrastructure serving those POEs in the California-Baja California

region. The Master Plan does not have an associated environmental analysis document, and no detailed analysis

of cultural resource impacts was conducted for this Master Plan (Caltrans 2021).


Areas in the San Diego region are known to have a high potential for prehistoric, historic, and cultural resources.

Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in the construction of development projects and

transportation network improvements that would result in a wide range of construction and ground-disturbing

activities, such as excavation, grading, and clearing, which remove and/or disturb the upper layer of soils. As

cultural resources have been found within inches of the ground surface in some areas of the San Diego region,

in some locations these ground-disturbing activities would cause a substantial adverse change in the

significance of a historical or unique archeological resource (Impact CULT-1). Implementation of the proposed

Plan would necessitate construction activities that in some locations would cause a substantial adverse change

in the significance of a historical or unique archeological resource through the physical demolition, destruction,

relocation, or alteration of a resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical

or unique archeological resource would be materially impaired. This would occur within each horizon year

analyzed (2025, 2035, and 2050). Therefore, impacts related to a substantial adverse change in the significance

of a historical or unique archeological resource would be significant.




As described in Section 4.5, the proposed Plan would result in ground-disturbing activities associated with

regional growth and land use change and planned transportation network improvements that in some

locations would unearth and impact buried human remains in 2025, 2035, and 2050. Impacts would be less

than significant because adherence to existing laws and regulations associated with the disturbance of human

remains as detailed in Section 4.5 ensures the appropriate handling of any human remains that are encountered

(CULT-2).

Impact of Related Projects

Projects planned in the Southern California region, such as the Navy OTC Revitalization Project, SDIA Airport

Development Plan, HST, City of San Diego Pure Water North City, would result in impacts related to destruction

or alteration of historical resources. Other land development and infrastructure projects throughout the region

and state, such as transportation infrastructure, energy generation and transmission corridors, and

commercial and residential land development would also result in impacts if these projects occur in areas

containing significant cultural resources.

For example, the HST project in the San Diego region would result in construction of track, bridges and elevated

guideways, stations, and other features that may result in destruction or alteration of cultural resources (HSRA

2005). The EIR/EIS prepared for the HST project determined that the project would result in significant

cumulative impacts on cultural resources. The EIR for the SDIA Airport Development Plan also identified

significant and unavoidable impacts to historical resources (SDCRAA 2019). Both the Navy Old Town Campus

Revitalization and City of San Diego Pure Water North City Project would result in impacts, however, impacts

associated with historical resources would be significant and mitigated to a level of less than significant

respectively. Impacts would similarly be cumulatively considerable, if these projects occur in close proximity

to one another.


Implementation of SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to

adverse changes in the significance of archaeological and historic built environment resources and potentially

disturb human remains. In addition, the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS’s influence on growth would contribute to

regionally significant impacts on cultural resources and be cumulatively considerable (SCAG 2020). The EIR

prepared for the County of San Diego General Plan Update found that, with mitigation, implementation of the

updated General Plan would result in less-than-significant direct or cumulative impacts on historical,

archaeological, or disturbance of human remains. The California-Baja California Border Master Plan does not

provide analysis of impacts on cultural resources; however, projects included in the Master Plan could have

adverse impacts on cultural resources due to ground disturbance necessary for construction of infrastructure


2025

A significant cumulative impact in year 2025 would result if the combined impacts of the proposed Plan,

impacts of related projects, and impact projections from adopted plans within the Southern California and

northern Baja region are significant when considered together, even if not independently significant. As

described above, implementation of the proposed Plan, related projects, and other adopted plans would result

in ground-disturbing activities that would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical

or unique archeological resource. California projects are required to adhere to federal, state and local




regulations, as described in Section 4.5; however, cumulative growth development located in Mexico would not

be subject to compliance with such regulations. Additionally, even with regulations in place, individual

historical or unique archeological resources could still be impacted or degraded from demolition, destruction,

alteration, or structural relocation as a result of new private or public development or redevelopment

allowable under the proposed plan or other adopted regional plans. Therefore, cumulative impacts on

historical and unique archeological resources would be significant. Because the proposed Plan’s impacts on

historical and unique archeological resources are significant, they are also cumulatively considerable in 2025.

In addition, implementation of the proposed Plan combined with development associated with other regional

plans and related projects would result in adverse impacts on human remains from development activities.

Development associated with the proposed Plan as well as in the SCAG region would be required to comply

with federal, state, and local regulations, as described in Section 4.5, if human remains are encountered.

Cumulative projects located in Mexico would not be subject to compliance with such regulations. However, the

proposed Plan’s contribution to these impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable, because required

compliance with federal, state, and local regulations would ensure the appropriate handling of any human

remains that are encountered (Impact C-CULT-1).

2035

The cumulative analysis presented above for year 2025 would be applicable to year 2035, and significant

cumulative impacts on cultural resources would occur. By 2035, increases in regional growth and land use

change, and the number of transportation network improvements implemented over those that occurred by

2025 would result in additional adverse impacts related to changes in the significance of a historical or unique

archeological resource. As described in the 2025 analysis, cumulative impacts on historical and unique

archeological resources would be significant because there would be cumulative adverse changes in the

significance of those resources due to the proposed Plan, other regional plans, and development located in

northern Baja California. Because cumulative cultural resource impacts throughout the Southern California and

northern Baja region by 2035 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts are

significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental cultural resource impacts are also cumulatively considerable

(Impact C-CULT-1).

2050

The cumulative analysis presented above for years 2025 and 2035 would be applicable to year 2050, and

significant cumulative impacts on cultural resources would occur. By 2050, increases in regional growth and

land use change, and the number of transportation network improvements implemented over those that

occurred by 2025 and 2035, would result in adverse impacts related to changes in the significance of a historical

or unique archeological resource.

As described in the 2025 analysis, cumulative impacts on historical or unique archeological resources would

be significant because there would be cumulative adverse changes in the significance of those resources due to

the proposed Plan, other regional plans, and development located in northern Baja California. Because the

proposed Plan’s impacts on cultural resources are significant, they are also cumulatively considerable in 2050

(Impact C-CULT-1).




Mitigation Measures

C-CULT-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

CULTURAL RESOURCES.

Mitigation measures CULT-1a and CULT-1b call for measures to avoid or substantially reduce adverse changes

in the significance of a cultural resource, and protect cultural resources listed on or eligible for listing on the

California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). These measures also require the implementation of

monitoring and data recovery programs during construction. The mitigation measures would be included in

project-level planning, design, and CEQA reviews. However, their implementation would not reduce impacts to

less than significant because it cannot be guaranteed that all future project-level impacts can be mitigated to a

less-than-significant level.

Because mitigation measures CULT-1a and CULT-1b would not reduce the proposed Plan’s incremental

impacts to less than significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative cultural resources

impacts in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-mitigation.

5.2.6 ENERGY

C-EN-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

ENERGY

The area of geographic consideration for cumulative energy impacts is the Southern California and northern

Baja region. The demand for energy is a common theme throughout the region. Land use change and the

transportation system would influence the demand for future energy development or the location and need for

new or additional energy infrastructure across the Southern California and northern Baja region. The provision

of energy can be linked to jurisdictions, but often service providers and their infrastructure cover large areas.

Thus, it is necessary to consider the Southern California and northern Baja region as a whole and the overall

amount of development that would generate additional pressure and demand on energy use and generation

facilities.

A hybrid approach to the cumulative energy analysis allows for an overarching discussion of regional impacts

associated with general patterns of regional urbanization, growth, and land use changes that would create new

or additional energy use, modify demand for the provision of energy, or dictate where new or expanded energy

infrastructure is located. Discussion of specific projects also allows for consideration of individual large-scale

existing and probable future projects with known impacts on energy resources.

Growth, land use change, and transportation system improvements occurring throughout the Southern

California and northern Baja region would impact energy demand, development, and supply. Cumulative

energy impacts would result if there were an increase in overall per capita energy consumption or inefficient,

wasteful, or unnecessary energy use; or obstruction of state and local renewable energy and energy efficiency

plans, regulations, and policies.

Documents considered in the cumulative energy analysis include the California Energy Commission’s (CEC)

California Energy Demand 2018-2030 Revised Forecast (CEC 2018), County of San Diego Strategic Energy Plan

2015-2020 (County of San Diego 2015), and San Diego Gas & Electric Company 2012 Long-Term Procurement

Plan (SDG&E 2012).





As detailed in Section 4.6, total energy use and per capita energy use in 2025, 2035, and 2050 would be less

than total energy use and per capita energy use in 2016. Therefore, the proposed Plan would not result in an

increase in overall per capita energy consumption or otherwise use energy in an inefficient, wasteful, or

unnecessary manner in 2025, 2035, or 2050, and the impact would be less than significant (Impact EN-1).

The county and various cities within the SANDAG region, in accordance with state law, will require the

implementation of a variety of energy efficiency and renewable energy measures to decrease fossil fuel energy

consumption as a means to reduce GHG emissions. As detailed in Section 4.6, the proposed Plan would comply

with the state’s programs and local plans and policies aimed at reducing energy consumption and promoting

renewable energy. Thus, this impact would be less than significant in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact EN-2).


Multiple energy projects in various stages of planning, permitting, and construction are ongoing in the Southern

California and northern Baja region. Some of these include the Crimson Solar Project in Blythe, California;

Palen-Nalep Solar, Victory Pass Solar, and Rice Solar energy projects in Riverside County; Carlsbad NRG and

Pio Pico Energy Center in San Diego County; Clean Hydrogen Energy and Comino Solar project in Kern County;

and Black Rock 5 & 6 Geothermal Power Project in Imperial County. All energy projects requiring CEC approval

or licensing must go through the CEC permitting process, which is a certified regulatory program under CEQA.

The CEC license/certification subsumes all requirements of state, local, or regional agencies otherwise required

before new infrastructure is constructed.

The HST environmental document states that, while the project would have a potentially significant effect

related to long-term electric power consumption when viewed on a system-wide basis, it represents a more

energy-efficient mode of transportation than travel by aircraft or car, such that the HST system would result in

an overall reduction in total energy consumption. The EIR/EIS states that the HST system would reduce energy

consumption overall and any localized energy impacts would be avoided through proper planning and design

of power distribution systems and their relationship with the overall power grid (HSRA 2005).

Energy impacts were found to be less than significant for the City of San Diego Pure Water North City Project

(City of San Diego 2018), and were not addressed in the Navy OTC Revitalization Draft EIS (Navy 2021).


The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR identified that implementation of the RTP/SCS would contribute to a

cumulatively considerable increase in non-renewable energy use that would be significant and unavoidable.

The EIR also found that the plan would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to the use of

electricity, natural gas, gasoline, diesel, and other non-renewable energy types in the construction and

expansion of the regional transportation system and forecasted development (SCAG 2020).

The CEC California Energy Demand 2018-2030 Revised Forecast report updates 10-year forecasts for

electricity and end-user natural gas in California and for major utility planning areas within the state. The

forecast includes estimates of additional achievable energy efficiency, electricity consumption, peak demand,

and natural gas consumption savings. While there is no associated environmental analysis, the forecast does

show the continued increase in demand for energy supplies in the state over the next 10 years (CEC 2018).




The County of San Diego Strategic Energy Plan provides high-level energy and sustainability objectives and

goals in the areas of energy and water conservation and efficiency, promotion of renewable energy; reduction

in demand for fossil fuel consumption and addressing vehicle emissions and VMTs, energy and sustainability

education and outreach; regional collaboration; and climate action planning. The main priorities for the plan

period are to control utility costs, accelerate distributed generation employment, facilitate alternative fuel

vehicle deployment, reduce the region’s carbon footprint, expand choice for consumer energy supply, and

increase the use of information technology to help reach objectives and inform the public (County of San Diego

2015).

SDG&E is a major provider of energy for the San Diego region. The objective of SDG&E’s 2012 Long-Term

Procurement Plan is to provide reliable electric supply to customers at the lowest cost, while also meeting the

state’s preferred loading order for resources and reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The long-term

plan (10 years) addresses both demand- and supply-side resources and makes recommendations to achieve

the appropriate balance between each of these resource types. The plan adds resources in the order of the

state’s priorities as follows: energy efficiency; demand response; renewable power; distributed generation; and

clean and efficient fossil-fired generation (SDG&E 2012).


2025

The proposed Plan would not result in an increase in overall per capita energy consumption or otherwise use

energy in an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary manner in 2025. Additionally, the proposed Plan would result

in a decrease of total and per capita energy use, including a decrease in fossil fuel energy. In addition, regional

growth and land use change and transportation network improvements and programs would not conflict with

or obstruct a state or regional plan related to the increased use of renewable energy or energy efficiency in

2025. Because the proposed Plan does not make an incremental contribution to these cumulative energy

impacts, cumulative energy impacts would not be significant, and the proposed Plan would not result in

cumulatively considerable impacts in 2025. Impacts would be less than significant.

2035


energy in an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary manner in 2035. Additionally, the proposed Plan would result

in a decrease of total and per capita energy use, including a decrease in fossil fuel energy. In addition, regional






2050


energy in an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary manner in 2050 because the proposed Plan would result in a

decrease of total and per capita energy use, including a decrease in fossil fuel energy. In addition, regional









Mitigation Measures

No mitigation is required.

5.2.7 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES

C-GEO-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

GEOLOGICAL AND SOIL RESOURCES

C-PALEO-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The area of geographic consideration for cumulative impacts is the Southern California and northern Baja

region. While some geology and soil features can be very distinct to certain locations, geologic features can also

have broad-reaching elements, such as faults and underlying bedrock formations. Geology, soils, and

paleontological resources are not confined by jurisdictional boundaries. Thus, it is necessary to consider

geologic resources, soils, and paleontological resources in Southern California and northern Baja as a whole

region.

A projection approach for cumulative analysis of geologic, soils, and paleontological resources allows for an

overarching discussion of regional and cross-border risks of seismic and geologic hazards, soil erosion or loss,

and destruction of unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features associated with general

patterns of regional urbanization, growth, and land use changes. The cumulative impact is the combination of

the impacts of the proposed Plan and impacts on geology, soils, and paleontological resources resulting from

implementation of approved regional planning documents. Significant cumulative impacts would occur if there

were cumulative risks of exposure of people or structures to substantial seismic or geologic hazards,

development on unstable geologic units, soil loss or erosion, or destruction of unique paleontological resources

or unique geologic features in Southern California and northern Baja. (Impacts related to development in areas

with unsuitable soils for septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are localized in nature, and

thus are not considered further in this cumulative impact analysis.)


Plan, SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR (SCAG 2020) for the Southern California region, the County of San Diego

General Plan Update EIR (County of San Diego 2011), and the California-Baja California Border Master Plan

(Caltrans 2021). There are generally no regional plans pertaining to such resources for the northern Baja

California region.


Regional growth and land use change and the transportation network improvements included as part of the

proposed Project would expose additional people and structures to seismic hazards such as strong seismic

ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction, and earthquake-induced landslides as some development would

occur in hazard areas within the San Diego region.




Future land development and transportation network improvements also would place structures at risk to

impacts caused by unstable soils, including expansive, collapsible, or unstable soils; landslides; and erosion or

loss of topsoil. Existing regulations discussed in Section 4.7 would ensure that these impacts would not be

significant in 2025, 2035, and 2050. Compliance with regulatory requirements and implementation of required

design measures would ensure that regional growth and land use change as well as transportation network

improvements and programs associated with the proposed Plan would not cause substantial soil erosion or the

loss of topsoil, and the impact would be less than significant in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact GEO-1 through

GEO-4).

Areas throughout the region have distinct geologic rock formations with known paleontological sensitivity and

areas with unique geologic features. Ground-disturbing activities, such as construction associated with

development, redevelopment, and transportation network improvements, in some locations would directly or

indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature. Existing federal, state,

and local laws, regulations, and programs included in Section 4.7 would help reduce impacts on paleontological

resources and unique geological resources, but there is no assurance that they would keep impacts from being

significant. Therefore, impacts on paleontological resources and unique geologic features would be significant

in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact PALEO-1).



Development Plan, HST, and City of San Diego Pure Water North City, would involve ground-disturbing

activities that could result in impacts related to destruction or alteration of paleontological resources. Other

land development and infrastructure projects throughout the region, such as transportation infrastructure,

energy generation and transmission corridors, and commercial and residential land development would also

result in impacts if these projects occur in areas containing significant paleontological resources.


guideways, stations, and other features that may result in destruction or alteration of paleontological resources

(HSRA 2005). The EIR/EIS prepared for the HST project determined that the project would result in significant

cumulative impacts on paleontological resources. The EIR for the SDIA Airport Development Plan did not

identify significant impacts to paleontological resources (SDCRAA 2019). The Navy Old Town Campus

Revitalization Project would also not result in impacts to paleontological resources (U.S. Department of the

Navy 2021). Impacts would similarly be cumulatively considerable, if these projects occur in close proximity

to one another. The City of San Diego Pure Water North City Project concluded that impacts on paleontological

resources would be less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures (City of San Diego

2018).


The EIR prepared for the SCAG 2020-2045 SCS/RTP EIR analyzed impacts on the SCAG region up to 2045 and

identified significant and unavoidable impacts related to implementation of that plan due to substantial soil

erosion and loss of topsoil and the destruction of a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic

feature. The EIR also found that the 2020-2045 SCAG RTP/SCS would contribute to a cumulatively considerable

impact related to the damage or destruction of paleontological resources (SCAG 2020). The EIR prepared for

the County of San Diego General Plan Update found that implementation of the updated General Plan would

not result in potentially significant direct or cumulative impacts associated with the exposure to seismic-

related hazards, soil erosion or topsoil loss, soil stability, expansive soils, or waste water disposal systems; and




with mitigation, the General Plan Update would result in less-than-significant direct or cumulative impacts on

paleontological resources (County of San Diego 2011).

Adopted land use plans for local jurisdictions in Southern California and northern Baja would support the

construction of new development and redevelopment through policy changes, general plan updates, and zoning

amendments that encourage and facilitate population growth and land use changes. Due to the seismically

active nature of the Southern California and northern Baja region, these development projects would subject

additional people and structures to ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction, and earthquake-induced

landslides. Projects would also be susceptible to impacts caused by unstable soils, including expansive,

collapsible, or unstable soils; and landsliding. The severity of these impacts would be determined by geographic

location, soil type, and construction requirements such as grading and excavation. Development associated

with the implementation of regional planning documents in California would be required to adhere to the

design standards described in the California Building Code (CBC) and the Uniform Building Code (UBC), which

regulate the design and construction of buildings and structures and effectively reduce the effects of seismic

activity and geologic hazards at the project level, as described in Section 4.7.

The California-Baja California Border Master Plan does not provide analysis of impacts on paleontological

resources; however, projects included in the Master Plan could have adverse impacts on paleontological

resources due to ground disturbance necessary for construction of infrastructure.


2025

A significant cumulative impact in the year 2025 would result if the combination of impacts of the proposed

Plan and impact projections from adopted plans within the Southern California and northern Baja region, and

related projects, were significant when considered together, even if not independently significant. As described

above, implementation of the regional growth and land use changes and transportation network improvements

associated with the proposed Plan would expose additional people and structures to seismic hazards such as

ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction, and earthquake-induced landslides as development occurs in

hazard areas within the San Diego region. Future development would also place structures at risk to impacts

caused by unstable soils, including expansive, collapsible, or unstable soils; landsliding; and erosion or loss of

topsoil. Some development would occur in areas with soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic

tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Whether from the proposed Plan or from development

associated with other approved plans, such as the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP, or from related projects, impacts

would generally be confined to a specific project area, rather than result in an aggregated cumulative effect

over the Southern California and northern Baja California region. All California development and infrastructure

projects would be required to adhere to the design standards described in the CBC and the UBC, which regulate

the design and construction of buildings and structures and substantially reduce the effects of seismic activity

and other geologic hazards at the project level, as described in Section 4.7. Therefore, cumulative impacts

related to geologic and seismic hazards or unstable soils would not be significant, and the proposed Plan would

not result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to geologic and seismic hazards or unstable soils.

Implementation of the proposed Plan combined with other regional plans, related projects, and development

in northern Baja California would result in a significant cumulative impact associated with paleontological

resources and unique geological features from extensive grading, excavation, or other ground-disturbing

activities. Development would be regulated by state and local laws and regulations, including CEQA and local

jurisdictions’ grading ordinances. However, cumulative growth and development located in Mexico would not




be subject to compliance with such regulations. Additionally, the loss of paleontological resources or unique

geological features on a regional level would not be adequately avoided or reduced through methods specified

in these regulations. Based on the above analysis, cumulative impacts on paleontological resources and unique

geological features would be significant. Because cumulative paleontological resource impacts throughout the

Southern California and northern Baja region by 2020 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s

incremental impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental paleontological resource and unique

geological feature impacts are cumulatively considerable (Impact C-PALEO-1).

2035

By 2035, transportation and development projects associated with the proposed Plan and other development

in Southern California and northern Baja would expose additional people and structures to geologic and seismic

hazards such as ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction, and earthquake-induced landslides, and would also

place structures at risk to impacts caused by unstable soils, including expansive, collapsible, or unstable soils,

and landsliding. All California development and infrastructure projects would be required to adhere to the

design standards described in the CBC and the UBC, which regulate the design and construction of buildings

and structures and substantially reduce the effects of seismic activity and other geologic hazards at the project

level, as described in Section 4.7. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to geologic and seismic hazards or

unstable soils would not be significant, and the proposed Plan would not result in cumulatively considerable

impacts related to geologic and seismic hazards or unstable soils.

As described in the 2025 analysis, cumulative impacts on paleontological resources and unique geological

features would be significant because there would be cumulative adverse changes in the significance of those

resources due to the proposed Plan, other regional plans, and development located in northern Baja California

(Impact C-PALEO-1).

2050

By 2050, transportation and development projects associated with the proposed Plan and other development

in Southern California and northern Baja would expose additional people and structures to geologic and seismic

hazards such as ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction, and earthquake-induced landslides, and would also

place structures at risk to impacts caused by unstable soils, including expansive, collapsible, or unstable soils,

and landsliding. Although the 2050 time period is beyond implementation of the planning horizons of regional

planning documents other than the proposed Plan, such as most adopted land use plans, this analysis would

apply to future projects in the Southern California and northern Baja region. All California development and

infrastructure projects would be required to adhere to the design standards described in the CBC and the UBC,

which regulate the design and construction buildings and structures and substantially reduce the effects of

seismic activity and other geologic hazards at the project level, as described in Section 4.7. Therefore,

cumulative impacts related to geologic and seismic hazards or unstable soils would not be significant, and the

proposed Plan would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to geologic and seismic hazards

or unstable soils.

As described in the 2020 analysis, cumulative impacts on paleontological resources and unique geological

features would be significant because there would be cumulative adverse changes in the significance of those

resources due to the proposed Plan, future projects, and development located in northern Baja California.

Because the proposed Plan’s impacts on paleontological resources and unique geological features are

significant, they are also cumulatively considerable in 2050 (Impact C-PALEO-1).




Mitigation Measures

C-PALEO-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS ON

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Mitigation measure PALEO-1a calls for project implementation agencies to assess impacts on unique

paleontological resources or unique geological features prior to construction of individual projects associated

with the proposed Plan. If a project is determined to be located within an area likely to contain unique

paleontological resource sensitivity or unique geologic features, implementation of mitigation measure

PALEO-1b calls for avoidance where feasible or provide a qualified paleontologist to be stationed on site of any

future development to monitor construction; identify valuable paleontological specimens, if any; and recover

and report on any significant resources found at the site.

Implementation of mitigation measures PALEO-1a and PALEO-1b would protect these unique resources

through the presence of a certified paleontologist and compliance with existing regulations; however, it cannot

be guaranteed that these measures will reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level for all projects.

Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative paleontological and unique geologic

feature impacts in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-mitigation.

5.2.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

C-GHG-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO GHG EMISSIONS

Climate change is a global problem and greenhouse gases (GHGs) persist in the atmosphere for long enough

time periods to be dispersed around the globe. Thus, the area of geographic consideration for cumulative

impacts of GHG emissions is global. Atmospheric concentrations of GHGs have been increasing since

measurements began in the 1970s. As of 2020, the globally averaged annual mean concentration of

atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) is approximately 413 parts per million (ppm), methane (CH4) is

approximately 1,891 parts per billion (ppb), and nitrous oxides (N2O) is approximately 333 ppb (NOAA 2021a,

2021b, and 2021c).

The projection approach to GHG considers both forecasted GHG emissions on a global scale, as well as a state

and local-level analysis of GHGs. In the SANDAG region, the transportation sector is the largest contributor of

GHG emissions. Thus, this analysis takes into consideration the cumulative GHG impacts resulting from the

overall future transportation improvements, future increases in population, and planned regional development

tied to the proposed Plan.

From the standpoint of CEQA, GHG impacts to climate change are inherently cumulative on a Statewide level.

Significant cumulative impacts would occur if the proposed Plan were to directly or indirectly result in an

increase in GHG emissions compared to existing project conditions; conflict with SB 375 GHG emission

reduction targets for 2035, SANDAG Board of Directors Resolution No. 2021-17, Local Climate Action Plans, or;

or be inconsistent with the State’s ability to achieve the 2030 reduction target of SB 32 and long-term reduction

goals of Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-55-18.


Plan, the 2016 GHG Inventory and Projections for the San Diego Region (SANDAG 2016), SB 375, the SANDAG

Board of Directors Resolution No. 2021-2017, and the California Air Resources Board 2017 Scoping Plan

Update (CARB 2017).





The proposed Plan’s regional growth and land use change and transportation network improvements would

create additional sources of GHG emissions. The proposed Plan supports sustainable growth through creating

a compact development pattern with growth focused in existing urban areas where transit and infrastructure

are already in place. Locating people and jobs near each other and near transit encourages use of transit,

carpooling, and active transportation options, thereby reducing transportation related GHG emissions. Also,

the proposed Plan encourages GHG emissions reductions through alternative transit improvements including

pedestrian network improvements, safe routes to schools strategies, bicycle network facilities, vanpools,

carpools, and buspools. GHG emissions in 2025, 2035, and 2050 would be lower than in 2016. Because the

proposed Plan would not directly or indirectly result in an increase in GHG emissions compared to existing

conditions, this is a less than significant impact in all forecasted years (Impact GHG-1).

The proposed Plan would not conflict with SB 375 emission reduction targets for 2035 or the SANDAG Board

of Directors Resolution No. 2021-17 emissions reduction target because it would result in reductions of per

capita CO2 emissions that exceed those targets. In addition, implementation of regional growth and land use

change and transportation network improvements and programs under the proposed Plan would not conflict

with or impede the implementation of adopted CAPs, GHG reduction plans, and/or sustainability plans for the

years 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact GHG-2 through GHG-4).

However, because the total emissions in the San Diego region in 2030 would exceed the 2030 regional GHG

reduction reference point of 15.6 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e), which is based

on the SB 32 targets for 2030 and the 2017 Scoping Plan, the proposed Plan’s GHG emissions would be

inconsistent with state’s ability to achieve the goals of SB 32 and these impacts would be significant in 2030. In

addition, because total regional GHG emissions in 2045 and 2050 would exceed the 2045 and 2050 reference

points of net zero and 5.2 MMTCO2e, respectively (based on the goals of EO B-55-18 and S-3-05), the proposed

Plan’s 2045 and 2050 GHG emissions would be inconsistent with the State’s ability to achieve the goals of EO

B-55-18 and S-3-05. Therefore, this impact would be significant in 2030, 2045, and 2050 (Impact AQ-5).


As stated in the Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report published by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic

emissions of GHGs are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human

and natural systems and that cumulative emissions of CO2 will largely determine global mean surface warming

by the late 21st century and beyond.

Scaling back from a global overview, Section 4.8 outlines a large number of federal, state, and local laws,

regulations, and policies that are aimed at reducing GHG emissions through a variety of means. On the federal

level, GHG reduction is mandated through energy policies, the CAFE program, CAA, and a series of executive

orders.

In 2019, emissions from GHG emitting activities statewide were 418.2 MMTCO2e, 7.2 MMTCO2e lower than

2018 levels and almost 13 MMTCO2e below the 2020 GHG Limit of 431 MMTCO2e (CARB 2021). The State of

California has a considerable policy and regulation regimen related to GHG reduction, including SB 32 and

associated 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan identifies measures for

how California can achieve the 2030 target set forth in SB 32, and substantially advance toward the 2050

reduction goal identified in EO-S-3-05. The 2017 Scoping Plan integrates several existing CARB regulations and




State strategies, including the Cap-and-Trade Program, Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), SB 350 goals for

renewable electricity procurement and doubling of Statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and

natural gas end uses, Mobile Source Strategy, Sustainable Freight Action Plan, and the Short-Lived Climate

Pollutant (SLCP) Strategy. The 2017 Scoping Plan accelerates the State’s focus on moving freight with zero and

near-zero technologies, investing in renewables, using low-carbon fuels including electricity and hydrogen,

reducing emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (e.g., CH4, black carbon, and fluorinated gases), creating

walkable communities with expanded mass transit and other alternatives to traveling by car, continuing the

cap-and-trade program, and managing natural lands to become carbon sinks (CARB 2017). Locally, GHG

emissions projections and reduction are addressed in various plans and policies, including local jurisdictions’

individual Climate Action Plans. However, while the State is currently on target for achieving GHG emission

reductions compared to existing conditions, there are currently no statewide plans for achieving state GHG

emissions reduction goals beyond 2030, and future Statewide cumulative GHG emissions are highly variable

and unknown; thus, cumulative impacts related to GHG emissions are potentially significant.


2025

A significant cumulative impact in the year 2025 would result if the combined impacts of the proposed Plan

and impact projections from adopted plans were significant when considered together, even if not

independently significant. GHG emissions and impacts to global climate change are inherently cumulative as

the quantity of GHGs that it takes to ultimately result in climate change is not precisely known; however, a

single project would be unlikely to measurably contribute to a noticeable incremental change in the global

average temperature. As described above, a wide variety of plans and regulations at all levels of government,

including global, federal, state, and local, provide for regulation and reduction of GHG emissions. However,

there is uncertainty about the ability of the nation and world to meet GHG reduction goals. Many of the

proposed strategies and mitigation proposed in GHG reduction plans and policies are based on new and

developing technology and can be highly dependent upon the global economy and other influencing factors.

As discussed in Section 4.8, implementation of the proposed Plan would decrease GHG emissions in 2025 from

2016 levels. The proposed Plan would not conflict with local climate action plans. However, uncertainty about

the ability for GHG emissions to be reduced by national and international efforts means that global GHG

emissions may not be reduced to 2016 levels. But because the proposed Plan’s GHG emissions decrease

between 2012 and 2020, and would not conflict with local climate plans, there is no significant GHG cumulative

impact in 2025, and the proposed Plan’s incremental contribution would not be cumulatively considerable.

2030 and 2035

Total emissions in the San Diego region in 2030 exceed the regional 2030 GHG reduction reference point based

on SB 32 the proposed Plan’s 2030 GHG emissions would be inconsistent with state’s ability to achieve SB 32

GHG reduction target This would be a significant impact. Also, uncertainty about the ability for GHG emissions

to be reduced by national and international efforts means that global GHG emissions may not be reduced on a

trajectory consistent with the SB 32 target.

As discussed in Section 4.8, implementation of the proposed Plan in 2035 would decrease GHG emissions from

2016 levels. Moreover, the proposed Plan would not conflict with SB 375 emission reduction targets for 2035

because it would result in a 20 percent reduction in per capita CO2 emissions from passenger cars and light-

duty trucks from 2005 levels by 2035, which exceeds the 2035 target of a 19 percent reduction for the SANDAG




region. The proposed Plan would not conflict with the SANDAG Board Resolution No. 2021-17 or local climate

action plans, and the proposed Plan’s incremental contribution for those thresholds using the 2035 horizon

would not be cumulatively considerable.

Because cumulative GHG impacts on a global basis would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s

incremental GHG impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental GHG impacts in 2030 would also be

cumulatively considerable (Impact C-GHG-1).

2045 and 2050

As discussed in Section 4.8, implementation of the proposed Plan in 2050 would decrease GHG emissions from

2016 levels. Also, the proposed Plan would not conflict with the SANDAG Board Resolution No. 2021-17 or local

climate action plans. However, because total emissions in the San Diego region in 2050 exceed the regional

2045 and 2050 GHG reduction reference points based on EO B-55-18 and EO S-3-05, the proposed Plan’s 2050

GHG emissions would be inconsistent with state’s ability to achieve the Executive Orders’ GHG reduction goals.

This would be a significant impact. Also, uncertainty about the ability for GHG emissions to be reduced by

national and international efforts means that global GHG emissions may not be reduced on a trajectory

consistent with the EO B-55-18 and EO S-3-05 goals.

Because cumulative GHG impacts on a global basis would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s

incremental GHG impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental GHG impacts in 2050 would also be

cumulatively considerable (Impact C-GHG-1).

Mitigation Measures

C-GHG-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO GHG EMISSIONS

Implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-5a through GHG-5f would reduce direct and indirect GHG

emission associated with the proposed Plan. These mitigation measures include actions such as competitive

grant funding for GHG-reducing projects, allocation of additional funding for electric vehicle-charging

infrastructure and incentives, allocation of funding to habitat creation, restoration, or enhancement projects

that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, implementing a regional carbon offset program, achieving

energy savings through a regional energy network, and measures to reduce GHG emissions from transportation

and development projects. Additional mitigation measures that would reduce GHG emissions are presented in

the air quality, energy, and water supply sections.

While SANDAG has the authority to implement mitigation measures GHG 5a through GHG-5f, AQ-3b, AQ-3c,

AQ-4, TRA-2, WS-1a, and WS-1b it has committed to, it has no legal authority to require other transportation

project sponsors or local jurisdictions to implement mitigation measures for specific projects for which they

have responsibility and jurisdiction. Based on the studies described in Section 4.8 in the introduction to the

mitigation section, even full implementation of all identified mitigation measures would not be sufficient to

reduce the proposed Plan’s GHG emissions below the regional 2030, 2035 and 2050 GHG reduction reference

points based on SB 32, EO B-55-18 and EO S-3-05. Full implementation of many of the measures that could

result in a reduction of GHG emissions. Mitigation measures GHG-5a through GHG-5f would help reduce

regional GHG emissions through reducing VMT, increasing use of alternative fuels, and other measures; they

would reduce inconsistency of the proposed Plan’s GHG emissions with the state’s ability to achieve the SB 32,

EO B-55-18, and EO S-3-05 GHG reduction goals. However, full implementation of changes required to achieve




he SB 32 target or Executive Orders’ goals is beyond SANDAG’s or local agencies’ current ability to implement.

Because the proposed Plan’s 2030, 2045 and 2050 GHG emissions would remain inconsistent with state’s

current ability to achieve the Executive Orders’ GHG reduction goals, this impact (Impact GHG-5) remains

cumulatively considerable post-mitigation.

5.2.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

C-HAZ-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Generally, the geographic scope of cumulative impact analysis for hazardous materials includes the area

immediately surrounding the affected hazardous materials location as the potential risk is limited to the area

immediately surrounding the affected hazardous material site or risk generator. However, other topics

associated with hazards such as transportation of hazardous materials, wildfire, and flooding can occur at large

regional-scales and as a result of growth, population increase, or land use change. Thus, consideration of the

Southern California and northern Baja California region is appropriate.

The projection approach is used for the cumulative analysis of hazards and hazardous materials to allow for an

overarching discussion of regional and cross-border hazards, associated with general patterns of regional

urbanization, growth, and land use changes. The consideration of regional development patterns and changes

provides for the ability to assess potential increases to regional hazards and regional transportation of

hazardous materials. The cumulative impact is the combination of the impacts of the proposed Plan and

impacts on or from hazards and hazardous materials resulting from implementation of approved regional

planning documents. Significant cumulative impacts would occur if there were cumulative significant risks of

hazardous material emissions, exposure of the public to hazardous materials, air traffic hazards, or impediment

of emergency response or evacuation.


Plan and the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR (SCAG 2020). Other plans with applicable information, but no

associated environmental analysis include: San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

(County of San Diego 2017); State of California Emergency Plan (California Emergency Management Agency

2017); and California-Baja California Border Master Plan (Caltrans 2021).


Regional growth and land use change and the transportation network improvements included in the proposed

Plan would increase the risk of significant hazards to the public and/or the environment through the routine

transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and the hazardous emissions generated and hazardous

emissions handled during pre-construction, demolition, and construction activities. Future development and

transportation network improvements would also occur near public airports and private airstrips, exposing

people to aircraft and airport-related safety hazards. Additionally, increased development and transportation

network improvements would in some locations cause obstruction for emergency response vehicles or result

in activities that would cause physical interference in the implementation of an emergency response and

evacuation plans or interfere with adequate emergency access. However, adherence to the existing regulations

discussed in Section 4.9 would ensure that these impacts would be less than significant in 2025, 2035, and 2050

(Impact HAZ-1 through HAZ-4).




Impact Projections of Related Projects

The environmental analyses for the other related projects, including the HST, the Airport Master Plan, the City

of San Diego Pure Water North City Project, and the Navy Old Town Campus Revitalization determined that

these projects have the potential increase the risk of significant hazards to the public and/or the environment

through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and the hazardous emissions generated

and hazardous emissions handled during pre-construction, demolition, and construction activities and could

have more localized hazardous materials. However, these plans would also be required to adhere to the existing

regulations discussed in Section 4.9, and as such these impacts would be less than significant (Impact HAZ-1

through HAZ-4).


The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR found that the increased mobility accommodated by the transportation

investments of the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would result in not only increased hazardous materials transport

through the SCAG region but also outside the area to result in cumulative impacts throughout Southern

California. As the population increases through 2045, the number of trips in the SCAG region that originate,

end, or pass through Santa Barbara, San Diego, and Kern counties as well as other counties and states would

increase, including trips involving the transportation of hazardous materials. Thus, the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS

would contribute to significant hazardous material transportation impacts in these other areas. The SCAG

2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR also determined that the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS had the potential to create a significant

hazard to the public through the reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of

hazardous materials into the environment, emit hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of an existing or

proposed school, result in development located on a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites

compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, involve projects located within an airport land use

plan, or within two miles of a public airport, which could result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people

residing or working in the area; and impair or interfere with an adopted emergency plan.

The County of San Diego and various jurisdictions throughout the county have prepared the San Diego County

Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, which provides a risk assessment and identification of hazards

prevalent within the region. The plan also outlined mitigation strategies and provided an explanation of how

jurisdictions intend to incorporate the mitigation strategies into existing planning mechanisms such as the

County Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Capital Improvement Plans, and Building Codes.

The state-wide State of California Emergency Plan addresses the state’s response to extraordinary emergency

situations associated with natural disasters or human-caused emergencies and describes the methods for

carrying out emergency operations, the process for rendering mutual aid, the emergency services of

governmental agencies, how resources are mobilized, how the public will be informed and the process to

ensure continuity of government during an emergency or disaster. While no environmental analysis

accompanies the plan, the State Emergency Plan emphasizes mitigation programs to reduce the vulnerabilities

to disaster and preparedness activities to ensure the capabilities and resources are available for an effective

response (California Emergency Management Agency 2017).



California-Baja California region (Caltrans 2021). The Master Plan does not have an associated environmental

analysis document; however, it is reasonable to assume that projects included in the Master Plan could have

adverse impacts related to hazards, including hazardous materials, airport safety hazards, and interference




with emergency and evacuation plans. Construction of new facilities could add to impacts from the projects

associated with both the SANDAG and SCAG RTP/SCSs as they add to the increased mobility and transportation

access throughout the California-Baja California region.


2025


impacts of related projects, and impact projections from adopted plans within the Southern California and

northern Baja region were significant when considered together, even if not independently significant. Future

development associated with increased population growth forecasted in the proposed Plan would increase the

number of people exposed to impacts related to hazardous materials, airport safety hazards, and interference

with emergency response or emergency evacuation. Impacts associated with these hazards would generally be

confined to a specific project area, rather than result in an incremental cumulative effect spread over the

Southern California and northern Baja region. Adherence to federal, state, and local regulations as described in

Section 4.9 would reduce incremental impacts associated with exposure to hazards and hazardous materials

in each of the affected project areas. Though projects located in Mexico would not be subject to such regulations,

all development throughout the region within the U.S. would be fully regulated and therefore cumulative

impacts associated with exposure to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant.

Future development and transportation network improvements forecasted in the proposed Plan would also

occur near public airports and private airstrips, exposing people to aircraft and airport-related safety hazards.

Related development infrastructure projects in the Southern California and northern Baja region would result

in changed land uses within the vicinity of a public airport or a private airstrip, and safety hazards for people

residing or working in these project areas. However, cumulative projects in the U.S. would be subject to safety

regulations as discussed in Section 4.9, such as ALUCPs, FAA standards, and the State Aeronautics Act, which

minimize airport hazards. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with exposing people to aircraft and

airport-related safety hazards near both public airports and private airstrips/helipads would be less than

significant.

Additionally, increased development and transportation network improvements in the proposed Plan would

in some locations cause obstruction for emergency response vehicles or result in activities that would cause

physical interference in the implementation of an emergency response and evacuation plans. Related growth,

development, and infrastructure projects in the Southern California and northern Baja region would also

impair existing emergency and evacuation plans. However, cumulative projects in the U.S. would be required

to adhere to the applicable emergency response and evacuation policies outlined in regulations discussed in

Section 4.9. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with the interference in the implementation of an

emergency response and evacuation plans would be less than significant.

2035

The cumulative analysis presented above for the horizon year of 2025 would be applicable to year 2035.

Therefore, less-than-significant cumulative impacts would be associated with significant hazards to the public

and/or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; hazardous

emissions emitted during construction activities; exposing people to aircraft and airport related safety hazards

near public airports and private airstrips; and the physical interference in the implementation of an emergency




response and evacuation plan. Cumulative impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials would be

less than significant.

2050

The cumulative analyses presented above for the horizon years of 2020 and 2035 would be applicable to year

2050. Therefore, there would be less-than-significant cumulative impacts associated with significant hazards

to the public and/or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials;

accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment; hazardous emissions emitted during

construction activities; exposing people to aircraft and airport-related safety hazards near public airports and

private airstrips; and the physical interference in the implementation of an emergency response and

evacuation plan. Cumulative impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials would be less than

significant.

Mitigation Measures

None required.

5.2.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

C-HWQ-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

The area of geographic consideration for cumulative impacts on hydrology and water quality is the Southern

California and northern Baja region. The analysis of cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts considers

how land use change and the transportation system would influence hydrology and water quality across the

Southern California and northern Baja region as a whole because the majority of water bodies within the San

Diego area are part of hydrologic systems located in multiple jurisdictions. As a result, water pollution or

alterations to a portion of a watershed produced by urban development in one jurisdiction can result in

hydrology and water quality impacts that affect other jurisdictions or the entire region.

A projection approach for hydrology and water quality cumulative analysis allows for an overarching

discussion of regional and cross-border impacts throughout multiple watersheds relative to hydrology and

water quality associated with general patterns of regional urbanization, growth, and land use changes. The

cumulative impact is the combination of the impacts of the proposed Plan and impact projections in adopted

regional documents addressing water quality or hydrology. Significant cumulative impacts related to hydrology

and water quality would occur if there were a: substantial degradation of water quality in violation of any water

quality standards or waste discharge requirements; substantial reduction in groundwater quantity or quality;

substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of an area such that flood risk, erosion, or siltation would

increase; exposure of people, structures, or facilities to a significant risk involving flooding; or exposure of

people or structures to a significant risk of inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

Some of the plans considered in the cumulative analysis include the Water Quality Control Plans for the five

basins within the greater region: San Diego Basin, Colorado River Basin, Santa Ana Basin, Los Angeles Basin,

and the Lahontan Basin. As discussed in Section 4.10, these basin plans set forth water quality objectives for

constituents that could have a significant impact related to the beneficial uses of water. Additionally, the San

Diego Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Plan was considered (Regional Water Management

Group 2019). While these documents do not have accompanying environmental analysis, they provide




important overarching strategies, future planning considerations, and planned large projects related to water

quality and hydrology throughout the region.


Compliance with existing regulatory requirements described in Section 4.10 would ensure that the regional

growth and land use change and the transportation network improvements would not result in: substantial

degradation of water quality in violation of any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements;

substantial reduction in groundwater quantity or quality; substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern

of an area such that flood risk, erosion, or siltation would increase; exposure of people, structures, or facilities

to a significant risk involving flooding; or exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of inundation by

seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. These impacts would be less than significant in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact

HWQ-1 through HWQ-4).


The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR identified the potential to violate water quality standards associated with

wastewater and storm water permits. The EIR also concluded that the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would alter the

existing drainage patterns in ways that would result in substantial erosion or siltation. Implementation was

found to also reduce groundwater infiltration due to increased impervious surfaces and increase flooding

hazards by locating projects on alluvial fans and within 100-year flood hazard areas. These water quality and

hydrology impacts would be significant and unavoidable, even with the implementation of proposed mitigation

(SCAG 2020).

This 2019 IRWM Plan was prepared by the San Diego Regional Water Management Group which consists of the

SDCWA, the City of San Diego, and the County of San. IRWM planning is a relatively new California initiative

with regional plans designed to improve collaboration in water resources management and comprehensively

address all aspects of water management and planning throughout an IRWM Region. IRWM plans cross

jurisdictional, watershed, and political boundaries; involve multiple agencies, stakeholders, individuals, and

groups; and attempt to address the issues and differing perspectives of all the entities involved through

mutually beneficial solutions. Specific to water quality, the IRWM includes Objective H to effectively reduce

sources of pollutants and environmental stressors to protect and enhance human health, safety, and the

environment (Regional Water Management Group 2019).

Water Quality Control Plans or Basin Plans have been written by each RWQCB. These plans determine the

beneficial uses of each water body within the basin and set forth narrative and numerical water quality

objectives for constituents that could have a substantial impact related to those beneficial uses. They also

describe implementation programs to protect the beneficial uses of all water in the region, and surveillance

and monitoring activities to evaluate the effectiveness of the Basin Plan. For example, the San Diego Basin Plan

includes multiple policies specific to the protection of water quality including Policy Three: Point sources and

nonpoint sources of pollution shall be controlled to protect designated beneficial uses of water and Policy Four:

Instream beneficial uses shall be maintained, and when practical, restored, and enhanced (CRWQCB 2016).

Adopted land use plans for local jurisdictions in Southern California would support the construction of new

development and redevelopment through policy changes, general plan updates, and zoning amendments that

encourage and facilitate population growth and land use changes. These development projects would impact

hydrology and water quality. The severity of these impacts would be determined by location of the projects

within the watersheds, and the sensitivity of the receiving bodies and the types of BMPs employed. All U.S.




projects would be required to adhere to all of the regulatory requirements described in Section 4.10. Projects

associated with policy changes and amendments would also impact hydrology and water quality, for the same

reasons as discussed with infrastructure projects.

Waste discharges into some receiving waters from northern Baja California would ultimately enter the Tijuana

River and the Pacific Ocean where the waste would impact beaches in the southern part of the San Diego region.

The Tijuana River is a 303(d) listed water body for various impairments. The Tijuana River Estuary, a National

Estuarine Sanctuary, supports a variety of threatened and endangered plants and animals and is 303(d) listed

for eutrophic conditions, indicator bacteria, lead, low dissolved, oxygen, nickel, pesticides, thallium, trash,

toxicity, and turbidity (SWRCB 2021). Discharges from northern Baja, which are not controlled by regional

regulations, would impact these water bodies within the region.


2025

A significant cumulative impact in the year 2025 would result if the combined impacts of proposed Plan and

impact projections from adopted plans within the Southern California and northern Baja region were

significant when considered together, even if not independently significant. As described above, federal, state,

and local water quality requirements would ensure that implementation of the proposed Plan would not result

in: substantial degradation of water quality in violation of any water quality standards or waste discharge

requirements; substantial reduction in groundwater quantity or quality; substantial alteration of the existing

drainage pattern of an area such that flood risk, erosion, or siltation would increase; exposure of people,

structures, or facilities to a significant risk involving flooding; or exposure of people or structures to a

significant risk of inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Cumulative impacts on these resources would be

less than significant due to federal and state regulatory requirements also applicable to development

throughout the region for the protection of water quality objectives to protect beneficial uses throughout

Southern California, and the effectiveness of regulations pertaining to water quality and hydrologic

modifications. However, cumulative water quality impacts occur as polluted water from northern Baja

California, which is not subject to federal and state regulatory requirements discharges into the Tijuana River

and affects the quality of receiving waters throughout the region. While cumulative impacts exist due to

unregulated polluted water that enters the region, the proposed Plan would not add to this cumulative water

quality impact for the reasons outlined above, including adherence to federal and state regulatory

requirements. Thus, the cumulative water quality impact would not be significant, and the proposed Plan’s

contribution to the cumulative water quality impact would not be cumulatively considerable in 2025.

2035

As described above, federal, state, and local water quality requirements would ensure that implementation of

the proposed Plan would not result in a substantial degradation of water quality in violation of any water

quality standards or waste discharge requirements; substantial reduction in groundwater quantity or quality;

substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of an area such that flood risk, erosion, or siltation would

increase; exposure of people, structures, or facilities to a significant risk involving flooding; or exposure of

people or structures to a significant risk of inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Cumulative impacts on

these resources from water sources originating in the United States would be less than significant due to federal

and state regulatory requirements also applicable to development throughout the region for the protection of

water quality objectives to protect beneficial uses throughout Southern California, and the effectiveness of

regulations pertaining to water quality and hydrologic modifications.




However, cumulative water quality impacts occur as polluted water from northern Baja California, which is not

subject to federal and state regulatory requirements, discharges into the Tijuana River and affects receiving

waters throughout the region. While cumulative impacts exist due to unregulated polluted water that enters

the region, the proposed Plan would not add to this cumulative water quality impact for the reasons outlined

above, including adherence to federal and state regulatory requirements. Thus, the cumulative water quality

impact would not be significant, and the proposed Plan’s contribution to the cumulative water quality impact

would not be cumulatively considerable in 2035.

2050

As described above, federal, state, and local water quality requirements would ensure that implementation of

the proposed Plan would not result in a result in a substantial degradation of water quality in violation of any

water quality standards or waste discharge requirements; substantial reduction in groundwater quantity or

quality; substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of an area such that flood risk, erosion, or

siltation would increase; exposure of people, structures, or facilities to a significant risk involving flooding; or

exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Cumulative

impacts on these resources would be less than significant due to federal and state regulatory requirements also

applicable to development throughout the region for the protection of water quality objectives to protect

beneficial uses throughout Southern California, and the effectiveness of regulations pertaining to water quality

and hydrologic modifications.

However, cumulative water quality impacts occur as polluted water from northern Baja California, which is not

subject to federal and state regulatory requirements, discharges into the Tijuana River and affects receiving

waters throughout the region. While cumulative impacts exist due to unregulated polluted water that enters

the region, the proposed Plan would not add to this cumulative water quality impact for the reasons outlined

above, including adherence to federal and state regulatory requirements. Thus, the cumulative water quality

impact would not be significant, and the proposed Plan’s contribution to the cumulative water quality impact

would not be cumulatively considerable in 2050.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation measures are not required.

5.2.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING

C-LU-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO LAND USE AND PLANNING

The geographic scope for the land use cumulative analysis is the Southern California region. While land uses

and development patterns are typically established in local land use planning documents specific to

jurisdictions, it is important to consider land use change and how the transportation system would influence

the development pattern across the Southern California region as a whole because land uses merge and flow

together along jurisdictional boundaries. A wide variety of land use patterns and development types can be

found throughout the Southern California region including urban and rural development, commercial and

industrial developments, military installations, tribal reservations, agricultural land, parks and open space, and

habitat conservation areas.

Use of the hybrid approach for the analysis of cumulative land use impacts allows for an overarching discussion

of regional land use capability, conflicts, or other land use impacts associated with general patterns of regional




urbanization, growth, and land use changes. As shown in Table 5-1, the population throughout the Southern

California region is forecasted to steadily increase throughout 2050.

The cumulative impact is the combination of the land use impacts of the proposed Plan, land use impact

projections in adopted plans, and impacts on land use resulting from substantial regional projects. Significant

cumulative impacts related to land use would occur if established communities are physically divided, or if

conflicts are created with land use plans adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental

effect.

This cumulative land use impact assessment considers the impact analysis presented in the SCAG 2020-2045

RTP/SCS and its EIR (SCAG 2020a, 2020b). The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and associated EIR generally

encompass Imperial, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles, and Ventura counties. The San Diego

County General Plan and its EIR (County of San Diego 2011) was used to consider land use effects within San

Diego County. Additionally, multiple agencies and jurisdictions have land use control throughout the region,

including local cities and counties, numerous military branches, tribal governments, state and federal agencies,

port authorities, and airport authorities that outline their policies in various planning documents.


The land use patterns outlined in the proposed Plan focus greater development intensity in existing urban

centers. The pattern of more intensive land uses, along with the transit improvements planned to service higher

intensity residential, commercial, and employment centers, is generally in character with the lifestyle and

character typical of compact urban communities. Impacts of growth and land use change on physically dividing

an established community would be less than significant. However, transportation network improvements,

such as new commuter rail extensions into previously unserved areas, could in some locations result in a

physical division of an established community in 2025, 2035 and 2050 (Impact LU-1).

Development patterns and growth forecasted to occur under the proposed Plan would generally be consistent

with applicable land use plans; in a few cases, the SCS land use pattern may conflict with specific land use

designations in General Plans, but impacts of SCS implementation are already evaluated in other sections of

this EIR so these conflicts would not cause new significant impacts. However, some transportation network

improvements, such as commuter line extensions into previously unserved areas, would in some locations

conflict with land use portions of adopted general plans or other applicable land use plans, and but also would

be less than significant because impacts of SCS implementation are already evaluated in other sections of this

EIR (Impact LU-2) .


Projects planned in the Southern California and northern Baja region, such as the HST, border/POE facility

improvements, airport expansions in the San Diego region, port/maritime improvements associated with Port

for All, or long linear projects such as rail pipeline or energy transmission infrastructure, would result in

impacts related to the physical division of established communities or conflicts with adopted general plans or

other applicable land use plans. For example, the HST project in the San Diego region would result in property

acquisition along existing rights of way and some acquisition along new rights of way in undeveloped areas,

resulting in significant displacement and land use compatibility impacts (HSRA 2005). The EIR/EIS prepared

for the HST project determined that the project would result in significant cumulative impacts on land use. The

EIR for the SDIA Airport Development Plan identified significant land use impacts due to conflict with certain

aspects of land use plans, policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an




environmental effect. The project would generate future noise and traffic impacts that are in conflict with

certain community plans and policies, resulting in significant and unavoidable impacts (SDIA 2019).

The EIS for the Navy OTC Revitalization Project evaluated several alternatives and determined that the project

would result in increased density under several alternative options that would contribute to significant

additional proposed growth in dwelling units, population, jobs, and non-residential uses over the targets

contained in the applicable community plan.


The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR found that implementation of the Connect SoCal Plan has the potential to

physically divide an established community and to conflict with existing land use plans. The proposed Plan

would result in an increase in density and land use development. Improved accessibility from the proposed

Plan could help facilitate urbanization to areas outside the region. Furthermore, changes in land use patterns

in the region (i.e., increased urbanization) could affect areas outside the region, resulting in increased

urbanization in adjacent jurisdictions, which would result in a regionally significant land use impacts (SCAG

2020a).

The County of San Diego General Plan Update EIR identified a potentially significant cumulative impact

associated with the physical division of an established community due to future roadway development under

the proposed General Plan Update, including new roads, road extensions, and widening of existing roads

throughout the County. The EIR found that the General Plan Update would not contribute to a significant

cumulative impact associated with conflicts with local plans, policies, and regulations (County of San Diego

2011).


2025


and impact projections from adopted plans within the Southern California region were significant when

considered together, even if not independently significant. As described above, implementation of the

transportation network improvements as considered in the proposed Plan would result in the division of

established communities and conflict with land use plans in 2025.

The combination of the direct land use impacts from the proposed Plan together with impacts of the adopted

plans and related projects described above, including the Navy OTC Revitalization, SDIA Airport Development

Plan, HST, SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and the County of San Diego General Plan Update would result in

significant cumulative land use impacts regarding the division of an established community by 2025.

Because cumulative land use impacts throughout the Southern California region by 2025 would be significant,

and because the proposed Plan’s incremental land use impacts associated with transportation network

improvements are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental land use impacts are also cumulatively

considerable (Impact C-LU-1).




2035

As described above, implementation of the transportation network improvements such as commuter rail

extensions into previously unserved areas in the proposed Plan would result in the division of established

communities in 2035. The combination of the direct land use impacts from the proposed Plan together with

impacts of the adopted plans and related projects described above, including the Navy OTC Revitalization, SDIA

Airport Development Plan, HST, SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and the County of San Diego General Plan Update

would result in significant cumulative land use impacts regarding the division of an established community by

2035.


and because the proposed Plan’s incremental land use impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental

land use impacts are also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-LU-1).

2050

As described above, implementation of the transportation network improvements such as commuter rail

extensions into previously unserved areas in the proposed Plan would result in the division of established

communities and conflict with land use portions of adopted general plans or other applicable land use plans in

2050. The 2050 time period is beyond the planning horizon of the adopted 2020-2040 SCAG RTP/SCS and the

County General Plan Update does not specify a planning horizon date. However, with anticipated long-term

growth and development throughout the region, it can be expected that similar land use impacts would

continue throughout the planning area. The combination of the direct land use impacts from the proposed Plan

together with impacts of the adopted plans described above, including the Navy OTC Revitalization, SDIA

Airport Development Plan, HST, SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and the County of San Diego General Plan Update

would result in significant cumulative land use impacts regarding the division of an established community by

2050.


and because the proposed Plan’s incremental land use impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental

land use impacts are also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-LU-1).

Mitigation Measures

C-LU-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO LAND USE AND PLANNING

Mitigation Measure LU-1 to reduce land use impacts due to transportation improvements as identified in

Section 4.11 would be applicable to cumulative land use impacts. Mitigation measure LU-1 calls for design of

transportation network improvements to provide access and connections to and within established

communities.

The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR provided a wide variety of mitigation measures to address land use conflicts

and impacts; however, even with implementation of mitigation, the EIR concluded that land use impacts would

remain significant and unavoidable (SCAG 2020a). The County of San Diego General Plan Update EIR required

mitigation to reduce the potentially significant cumulative impact related to the division of a community to less

than significant. Mitigation included coordination with adjacent cities and agencies regarding planning and

transportation improvements, coordination with land owners, other departments and community groups, and

maintenance plans and standards for infrastructure and roads so that community division does not occur. The




cumulative impact was found to be less than significant after the application of mitigation (County of San Diego

2011).

The overall proposed redevelopment associated with the Navy OTC Revitalization project would represent a

change from existing land use and a recreation shortfall from the goals in the community plans. Therefore,

implementation of the alternatives when combined with the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions

would result in significant cumulative impacts on land use within the project study area.

The SDIA Airport Development Plan found that with implementation of mitigation measures, land use planning

inconsistency impacts would be less than significant, but impacts related to noise and traffic incompatibilities

would remain significant and unavoidable.

As outlined in Section 4.11, mitigation measures would not guarantee reduction of all proposed Plan land use

impacts to below a level of significance. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to the

cumulative land use impacts in years 2025, 2035 and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-

mitigation.

5.2.12 MINERAL RESOURCES

C-MR-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO MINERAL RESOURCES


region. While some mineral resources can be distinct to certain locations, they are not confined by jurisdictional

boundaries. Thus, it is necessary to consider availability of mineral resources in Southern California and

northern Baja as a whole region.

A projection approach for cumulative analysis of mineral resources allows for an overarching discussion of

regional and cross-border loss of availability of mineral resources associated with general patterns of regional

urbanization, growth, and land use changes. The cumulative impact is the combination of the impacts of the

proposed Plan and impacts on mineral resources resulting from implementation of approved regional planning

documents. Significant cumulative impacts would occur if there were cumulative risks of loss of availability of

valuable mineral resources or recovery sites in Southern California and northern Baja.


Plan, and SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR (SCAG 2020b) for the Southern California region. There are generally

no regional plans pertaining to such resources for the northern Baja California region.


Regional growth and land use changes and transportation network improvements associated with the

proposed Plan would cause loss of availability of known mineral resources, as land development and

transportation network improvements would encroach into MRZs and other locally important resource

recovery sites, resulting in the loss of 853 acres of MRZ-2 lands by 2050. As such, mineral resources impacts

would be significant for 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact MR-1).





The EIR prepared for the SCAG 2020-2045 EIR/SCS RTP analyzed impacts on the SCAG region up to 2045 and

identified significant and unavoidable impacts related to the loss of availability of known mineral resources.

The EIR also found that the 2020-2045 SCAG RTP/SCS would contribute to cumulatively considerable impacts

on mineral resources (SCAG 2020a). Adopted land use plans for local jurisdictions in Southern California and

northern Baja would support the construction of new development and redevelopment through policy changes,

general plan updates, and zoning amendments that encourage and facilitate population growth and land use

changes. Development associated with the implementation of regional planning documents would in some

cases also impact availability of known mineral resources, as development would likely occur in some locations

within MRZs or resource recovery sites.


2025


Plan and impact projections from adopted plans within the Southern California and northern Baja region were

significant when considered together, even if not independently significant.

The proposed Plan would significantly impact loss of availability of known mineral resources due to

development in locations within MRZs or resource recovery sites. Combined with loss of availability of mineral

resources from implementation of adopted regional planning documents, impacts from the proposed Plan

would also result in significant cumulative impacts on availability of known mineral resources.

Because cumulative mineral resources impacts throughout the Southern California and northern Baja region

by 2025 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts on these resources are

significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts on mineral resources are cumulatively considerable

(Impact C-MR-1).

2035

The proposed Plan would also significantly impact loss of availability of known mineral resources due to



would also result in significant cumulative impacts on availability of known mineral resources in 2035.

Because cumulative mineral resources impacts throughout the Southern California and northern Baja region

by 2035 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts on these resources are


(Impact C-MR-1).

2050

The proposed Plan would also significantly impact loss of availability of known mineral resources due to



would also result in significant cumulative impacts on availability of known mineral resources in 2050.




Because cumulative mineral resource impacts throughout the Southern California and northern Baja region by

2050 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts on these resources are


(Impact C-MR-1).

Mitigation Measures

C-MR-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO MINERAL RESOURCES

Mitigation measures MR-1a and MR-1b would conserve aggregate and mineral resources through avoidance

of aggregate and mineral resources, or incorporation of appropriate design features to reduce impacts on

resources when avoidance is not feasible. However, as outlined in Section 4.7, this mitigation measure would

not guarantee that all proposed Plan impacts on availability of known mineral resources would be less than

significant. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative impacts on availability of

known mineral resources in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-

mitigation.

5.2.13 NOISE AND VIBRATION

C-NOI-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO NOISE AND VIBRATION

The geographic scope for the noise and vibration cumulative analysis is the Southern California and northern

Baja Mexico region. Transportation networks, including facilities such as the regional roadway/Interstate

networks, rail lines, and airports, are large contributors to environmental noise in the region. Development,

growth, population increase, or land use change can cause an increase in ambient noise and vibration directly

related to the type of development, increased use of transportation facilities and the general introduction of

new sources of noise and vibration.

This cumulative noise impact assessment considers the impact analysis presented in the SCAG 2020-2045

RTP/SCS and its EIR (SCAG 2020a, 2020b); California-Baja California Border Master Plan (Caltrans 2021); and

the 2008 2019 San Diego International Airport Development Plan, Airport Master Plan Environmental Impact

Report EIR (SDCRAA 2019a08).


The analysis of the proposed Plan shows that regional growth and land use change associated with the

proposed Plan would expose noise-sensitive receptors to noise levels in excess of applicable noise standards,

and transportation network improvements associated with the proposed Plan would generate construction

and operational noise levels that would expose noise-sensitive receptors (i.e., residences, churches, hospitals,

etc.) to noise levels in excess of applicable noise standards. This exposure of persons to or generating noise

levels exceeding applicable noise standards established by local jurisdictions and/or other agencies is

considered a significant impact in horizon years 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact NOI-1).

Regional growth land use change and transportation network improvements under the proposed Plan in

horizon years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would also result in conditions where construction of new development

and transportation network improvements would temporarily increase noise levels during construction at

surrounding land uses. While construction-related noise impacts would be short term and localized in nature,




construction would result in a substantial increase in ambient noise level or would result in exceedances of

applicable noise standards established by local jurisdictions and/or other agencies, which would be a

significant impact in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact NOI-1).

Under the proposed Plan, land use development increase relative to the existing development, which would

expose noise-sensitive receptors in close proximity to new noise sources. The increases in population, housing,

and employment in the proposed Plan would result in increases in noise levels by the placement of operational

stationary and traffic noise sources from new residential, commercial, or industrial uses in proximity to noise

sensitive receptors. The transportation network improvements in the proposed Plan would permanently

increase ambient noise levels adjacent to transportation network improvements. Ambient noise level increases

associated with transportation network improvements would primarily result from forecasted regional

population growth, the improvements to the transportation networks which removed shielding or move the

facility close to noise sensitive land uses, and the increases in the number of trucks, buses, and trains operating

forecasted under the proposed Plan, which generate greater noise per vehicle than automobiles (Caltrans

2013). These substantial permanent increases in ambient noise levels due to regional growth and land use

change, and transportation network improvements are considered a significant noise impact in 2025, 2035,

and 2050 (Impact NOI-1).

Implementation of regional growth and land use change, as well as transportation network improvements and

programs, associated with the proposed Plan would also result in exposure of persons to or generation of

excessive groundborne vibration and groundborne noise during certain construction activities in 2025, 2035,

and 2050 (Impact NOI-2).

The growth and land use changes of the proposed Plan would occur near public use or military airports, and

private airstrips or helipads; however, existing aviation regulations, procedures, ALUCPs, and AICUZ studies

would ensure compatibility with public use or military airports, and FAA and Caltrans regulations would

ensure compatibility with private airstrips or helipads. Therefore, the impact of exposing people to excessive

aviation noise would be less than significant in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact NOI-3).

Impact of Related Projects

Other related regional projects, such as the HST, could have more localized construction and operational noise

impacts which would occur along the project alignment. Other land development and infrastructure projects

throughout the region and state, such as petroleum pipeline transportation infrastructure, and freight rail

infrastructure, and energy generation and transmission corridors, would also impacts related to noise if these

projects occur in close proximity to one another as well as within the same time frame.

Both the Navy Old Town Campus Revitalization and City of San Diego Pure Water North City Project would

result in impacts, however, impacts associated with noise would be significant and mitigated to a level of less

than significant respectively. Impacts would similarly be cumulatively considerable, if these projects occur in

close proximity to one another as well as within the same time frame.


The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR found that construction activities associated with the proposed

transportation projects and development projects in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would temporarily generate

substantial noise and vibration levels above ambient background levels, sometimes for extended duration, and

would result in a significant impact. Additionally, noise-sensitive land uses could be exposed to operational




noise in excess of normally acceptable noise levels and/or could experience substantial increases in noise as a

result of the operation of expanded or new transportation facilities or increased transportation activity. The

EIR also found that the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would contribute to cumulative ambient noise and vibration levels

in areas outside the region as a result of the operation of expanded or new transportation facilities (i.e.,

increased traffic resulting from new infrastructure and use of new and existing transit and rail facilities) (SCAG

2020b).



California-Baja California region. The Master Plan does not have an associated environmental analysis

document; however, projects included in the Master Plan could have adverse noise impacts due to the

expansion of existing, and development of new, transportation facilities that could generate noise and vibration

in excess of the ambient condition.

The 2019 San Diego International Airport Development Plan EIR (SDCRAA 2019a) 2008 San Diego

International Airport, Airport Master Plan EIR (SDCRAA 2008) was certified in May 2008 by the Airport

Authority Board. The EIR considered potential aviation, surface transportation, construction, and cumulative

noise impacts associated with the Airport Master Development Plan and its alternatives. The EIR found that no

the Airport Development Plan’s cumulative noise impact would occur be cumulatively considerable in

combination with aircraft and highway roadway noise exposure levels. Construction and surface

transportation noise changes due to the Airport Master PlanDevelopment Plan were found to be less than

significant. The EIR also identified no substantial change in noise affecting sleep or affecting schools and found

a less-than-significant impact in terms of cumulative aircraft-induced noise exposure due to the Airport Master

Plan or its alternatives (SDCRAA 2008).


2025


Plan, and impact projections from adopted plans were significant when considered together, even if not

independently significant. As described above, implementation of the proposed Plan’s transportation network

improvements and future development would cause exceedances of noise standards or increases in ambient

noise and result in substantial short-term and permanent increases in the existing noise environment at

adjacent sensitive land uses in 2025. In addition, significant noise impacts have been identified in other regional

environmental analysis documents. The combination of the direct noise impacts from the proposed Plan and

other adopted plans that would affect the San Diego and northern Baja region would therefore result in

significant cumulative noise impacts, based on exposure to or generation of: noise levels in excess of standards,

substantial temporary and permanent increases in noise levels, and excessive groundborne vibration and

groundborne noise. Because cumulative noise impacts throughout the San Diego and northern Baja region by

2025 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental noise impacts are significant, the

proposed Plan’s incremental noise impacts are also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-NOI-1).

As described above, implementation of the proposed Plan would not cause exposure to excessive aviation noise

due to regional growth and land use change or transportation improvements and related noise impacts would

be less than significant. SimilarlyAs discussed above, while the 2008 2019 San Diego International Airport,

Airport Master Development Plan EIR identified no a cumulative aircraft-induced noise exposure due to the

Airport Master Development Plan (SDCRAA 20082019a), the proposed Plan’s impacts related to aircraft noise




exposure would be less than significant. As such, the proposed Plan would not contribute to cumulative impacts

related to aircraft noise and . Because significant cumulative noise impacts associated with exposure of people

to excessive noise levels from aircraft operations would not occur within the region, the proposed Plan’s less-

than-significant noise impacts associated with aircraft noise exposure are not cumulatively considerable.

2035

As described above, implementation of the proposed Plan’s transportation network improvements and

regional growth and land use change would cause exceedances of noise standards and result in substantial

temporary and permanent increases in the existing noise environment at adjacent sensitive land uses in 2035.

In addition, significant noise impacts were also identified in other regional environmental analysis documents.

The combination of the direct noise impacts from the proposed Plan and other adopted plans that would affect

the San Diego and northern Baja region would result in significant cumulative noise impacts, based on exposure

to or generation of: noise levels in excess of standards, substantial temporary and permanent increases in noise

levels, and excessive groundborne vibration and groundborne noise. Because cumulative noise impacts

throughout the San Diego and northern Baja region by 2035 would be significant, and because the proposed

Plan’s incremental noise impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s impacts are also cumulatively

considerable (Impact C-NOI-1).

As described for 2025, because while significant cumulative noise impacts associated with exposure of people


than-significant noise impacts associated with aircraft noise exposure would not result in a cumulatively

considerable contribution to aircraft noise exposure, and the proposed Plan’s impacts related to aircraft noise

exposure are not cumulatively considerable in 2035.

2050

As described above, implementation of the proposed Plan’s transportation network improvements and

regional growth and land use change would cause exceedances of noise standards and result in substantial

temporary and permanent increases in the existing noise environment at adjacent sensitive land uses in 2050.

In addition, significant noise impacts were also identified in other regional environmental analysis documents.

The combination of the direct noise impacts from and the proposed Plan and other adopted plans that would

affect the San Diego and northern Baja region would result in significant cumulative noise impacts, based on

exposure to or generation of: noise levels in excess of standards, substantial temporary and permanent

increases in noise levels, and excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. Because cumulative noise

impacts throughout the San Diego and northern Baja region by 2050 would be significant, and because the

proposed Plan’s incremental noise impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental noise impacts are

also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-NOI-1).

As described for 2025, because while significant cumulative noise impacts associated with exposure of people


than-significant noise impacts associated with aircraft noise exposure would not result in a cumulatively

considerable contribution to aircraft noise exposure, and the proposed Plan’s impacts related to aircraft noise

exposure are not cumulatively considerable in 2050.




Mitigation Measures

C-NOI-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO NOISE AND VIBRATION

Mitigation measure NOI-1a calls for construction noise reduction measures to meet local noise standards and

reduce temporary noise levels during construction and mitigation measures NOI-1b and NOI-1c call for

operational noise reduction measures for transportation network improvements and development projects,

respectively, to be implemented to meet local standards and reduce permanent noise levels during operations.

As outlined in Section 4.13, mitigation measures would reduce noise impacts but would not guarantee

reduction of all proposed Plan noise impacts on below a level of significance for all projects. Therefore, the

proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative noise impacts in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would

remain cumulatively considerable post-mitigation.

Mitigation measure NOI-2a calls for groundborne vibration and groundborne noise reduction measures to be

implemented during construction activities and mitigation measure NOI-2b requires groundborne vibration

and groundborne noise-reducing measures for rail operations. As outlined in Section 4.13, mitigation measures

would reduce significant increases in groundborne vibration and groundborne noise for some projects;

however, it cannot be guaranteed that all future project-level impacts can be mitigated to a less-than-significant

level. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative groundborne vibration and

groundborne noise impacts in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-

mitigation.

5.2.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING

C-POP-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO POPULATION AND HOUSING


region. Large-scale land use change and the effectiveness of the transportation system influence the regional

development pattern that dictates the location, timing, and amount of resulting population and housing

increases or decreases across the region as a whole. If growth is not accommodated in one specific area, it

would likely be accommodated at another locale within the general area. Thus, the entire region needs to be

considered when addressing population and housing.

A projection approach is used for the cumulative analysis of population and housing impacts as growth, land

use change, and transportation network improvements across the region can substantially impact and modify

population and housing by supporting and facilitating the addition or displacement of homes and population

on a large scale. The cumulative impact is the combination of the impacts of the proposed Plan and impacts of

population and housing impact projections identified in adopted plans. Significant cumulative impacts related

to population and housing would occur if the proposed Plan and other planning documents would induce

substantial increases in unplanned population growth or contribute to displacement of a substantial number

of existing people or housing units which would necessitate the construction of replacement housing

elsewhere.


Plan; SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR (SCAG 2020a); and the California-Baja California Border Master Plan

(Caltrans 2021). Information on population forecasts and transportation network improvements was compiled




from the documents listed in Section 5.1. Table 5-1 shows these population forecasts for 2025, 2035, and 2050.

Information on planned residential development and land use changes in Southern California is also available

in adopted land use plans for individual cities and counties.


Implementation of regional growth and land use change and planned transportation network improvements

would induce unplanned growth in some areas of the San Diego region in 2025, 2035, and 2050. This is

considered a significant impact (Impact POP-1). By 2025, 2035, and 2050, the proposed Plan’s regional growth

and land use change would have the potential to displace a substantial number of residences, necessitating the

construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Transportation network improvements, such as new rail

extensions would also have the potential to displace a substantial number of people and existing housing units.

As such, impacts related to the displacement of a substantial number of people and existing housing units,

necessitating the construction of replacement elsewhere is significant in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact POP-

2).


According to the EIR prepared for the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, the proposed Plan would facilitate population

growth in some areas of the SCAG region. It also found that transportation network improvements would

displace a substantial number of existing homes due to ROW acquisitions. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would

influence the pattern of growth in the region through transportation investments and land use strategies that

would contribute to a cumulatively considerable increase in population outside the region. These impacts were

found significant and unavoidable (SCAG 2020a).



California-Baja California region. The projects included in the Master Plan would support and facilitate current

and projected cross-border travel demand and economic activity as populations on both sides of the border

are forecasted to increase. Thus, the Master Plan would induce population growth and economic development.

Adopted land use plans for local jurisdictions in Southern California and northern Baja would induce

population growth through policy changes and zoning amendments that encourage and facilitate increased

residential and employment growth. Some of this growth, particularly in currently built-out locations, would

be driven by redevelopment in existing urban areas as communities increase their housing and commercial

densities. For redevelopment to occur, existing housing and population would likely be displaced.


2025

A cumulative impact in the year 2025 would result if the combined impacts of the proposed Plan and impact

projections from adopted plans within the Southern California and northern Baja region were significant when

considered together, even if not independently significant. As described above, implementation of the regional

growth and land use change as well as transportation network improvements associated with the proposed

Plan would induce substantial unplanned population growth. Additionally, by 2025, regional growth and land

use change would displace a substantial number of existing homes and population. In addition, population and

housing impacts were also identified in other land use plans would contribute to substantial unplanned

population growth and/or displacement of homes or population. The combination of the direct population and




housing impacts from the proposed Plan and these adopted plans would result in significant cumulative

population and housing impacts in the Southern California and northern Baja region by 2025.

Because cumulative population and housing impacts throughout the Southern California and northern Baja

region by 2025 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts are significant, the

proposed Plan’s incremental population and housing impacts are also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-

POP-1).

2035

As discussed in the 2025 analysis, implementation of the regional growth and land change as well as

transportation network improvements associated with the proposed Plan by 2035 would induce substantial

unplanned population growth and displace a substantial number of existing homes and population. In addition,

population and housing impacts were also identified in other land use plans would contribute to substantial

unplanned population growth and displacement of homes or population. The combination of the direct

population and housing impacts from the proposed Plan and these adopted plans would result in significant

cumulative population and housing impacts in the Southern California and northern Baja region by 2035.




POP-1).

2050

As discussed in the 2025 and 2035 analyses, implementation of the regional growth and land change as well as

transportation network improvements associated with the proposed Plan would induce substantial unplanned

population growth and displace a substantial number of existing homes and population. While the analysis of

the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS does not extend to 2050, regional population growth and associated impacts

would continue through this timeframe.

Although currently adopted land use plans rarely extend to 2050, infrastructure improvement projects, policy

changes, and zoning amendments that support residential and employment growth would induce population

growth beyond their timeframes. Policy changes and zoning amendments that allow and encourage higher-

density residential and employment uses would likely continue to displace existing homes and population. The

combination of the direct population and housing impacts from the proposed Plan and these projects and

adopted plans would result in significant cumulative population and housing impacts in the Southern California

and northern Baja region by 2050.




POP-1).

Mitigation Measures

C-POP-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO POPULATION AND HOUSING




Mitigation regarding inducement of substantial unplanned population growth by the proposed Plan was found

to be infeasible. As described in Section 4.14, SANDAG has no control over the amount of growth the region

would experience during the implementation of the proposed Plan. For the same reasons, mitigation to reduce

population growth in Southern California and northern Baja would also be considered infeasible.

Section 4.14 of the proposed Plan includes mitigation measures POP-2a and POP-2b, which calls for project

designs that reduce displacement. Even with implementation of mitigation, displacement impacts would be

significant and unavoidable.

The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR includes a similar mitigation measure as the proposed Plan to implement

growth strategies and urban form design enhancing mobility and reducing land consumption. The SCAG 2020-

2045 RTP/SCS EIR also includes measures to minimize displacement of homes and provide affordable housing

(SCAG 2020a). These mitigation measures and design strategies would reduce impacts on the displacement of

residences, but would not reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels. Displacement of homes and population

from regional growth and land use changes would remain cumulatively considerable.

Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative population and housing impacts in

years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-mitigation.

5.2.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES

C-PS-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO PUBLIC SERVICES

C-U-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO UTILITIES

C-REC-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO RECREATIONAL RESOURCES

The area of geographic consideration for cumulative impacts on public services and utilities is Southern

California and northern Baja. Public services and utilities are common infrastructure throughout the region,

and land use change and the transportation system would influence the location and demand for future

development new or additional services and utilities across the region. The provision of public services and

utilities can be linked to jurisdictions, but often service providers cover large areas spanning multiple

jurisdictional boundaries. Also, while some recreational facilities are local and serve only a small neighborhood,

other recreational facilities provide opportunities for the population throughout the region. Thus, it is

necessary to consider the region as a whole and the overall amount of development that would generate

additional pressure and demand on services, utilities, and recreation facilities.

The projection approach for the analysis of cumulative public services and utility impacts allows for an

overarching discussion of regional impacts associated with general patterns of regional urbanization, growth,

and land use change that would create new or additional demand for services, utilities, and recreation facility

use, or dictate where new or expanded infrastructure is located.

Growth, land use change, and transportation system improvements occurring throughout the Southern

California and northern Baja region would impact public services and utilities. Significant cumulative impacts

related to public services and utilities would occur if the combination of impacts from the proposed Plan and

impact projections in adopted plans would cause a substantial physical deterioration of public facilities or




cause substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of, or need for, new or physically

altered public facilities to maintain adequate fire and police protection, schools, libraries, and recreation

facilities; or result in the expansion or construction of wastewater treatment, storm water drainage,

electricity/natural gas, or solid waste disposal facilities to adequately meet projected capacity needs or comply

with regulations, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts

The plans considered and relied on for this cumulative analysis include the SCAG Regional Transportation

Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy 2020-2045 and its EIR (SCAG 2020a). Additionally, public service or

utility providers, including cities, counties, special districts, school districts, and utilities that operate in

Southern California and northern Baja region, have adopted long-term plans that forecast the demand for

services and identify specific facilities projects required to meet projected demand and needs.


Analysis in Section 4.15 of the proposed Plan describes how regional growth and land use change would

increase demand for public services including fire and police protection, emergency services, schools, libraries,

and recreational facilities. Section 4.15 also describes how the proposed Plan would increase demands on

governmental facilities such as wastewater collection and treatment facilities, storm water drainage facilities,

energy infrastructure, and solid waste facilities. This regional growth would require or result in the

construction of new facilities or expansion of existing facilities, due to the higher levels of public service

demand. This would result in short-term construction-related impacts, as well as operational impacts, to

resources such as air quality, noise, and traffic. These impacts are typically reduced through actions of the

implementing agency, including adherence to existing regulations and BMPs, but are considered significant

because impact mitigation to less-than-significant levels for all projects cannot be guaranteed. Therefore, as

described in Section 4.15, public service and utilities impacts due to the regional growth and land use change

in the proposed Plan are significant in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impact PS-1) (impacts related to construction of

new or expanded solid waste facilities are less than significant in 2025).

Implementation of transportation network improvements would require minor use of public services and

utilities and would generally not cause substantial deterioration or the need for new facilities. However,

transportation network improvements associated with the proposed Plan would contribute to substantial

adverse physical impacts associated with the construction of new or expanded storm water facilities in 2025,

2035, and 2050 (Impact U-1) and also in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the construction

of new or expanded solid waste facilities in 2035 and 2050 (Impact U-2).

Implementation of regional growth and land use changes, as well as transportation network improvements,

would result in increased demand for recreation facilities leading to accelerated deterioration and contribute

to the physical removal of open space park and recreation lands. The proposed Plan would result in the

removal of 988 acres of open space park and recreation lands in 2025, 1,512 acres by 2035, and 1,585 acres by

2050. Collectively, these impacts (Impact REC-1) would result in the substantial physical deterioration of

existing park and recreation facilities and adverse physical impacts related to future facility expansions.


Projects planned in the Southern California region, such as the Navy OTC Revitalization Project, border/POE

facility improvements, airport expansions in the San Diego region, or port/maritime improvements associated

with the Port Master Plan Update, would result in impacts related to increased demand for governmental

utilities such as wastewater collection and treatment facilities, storm water drainage facilities, energy




infrastructure and solid waste facilities. This regional growth would require or result in the construction of

new facilities or expansion of existing facilities, due to the higher levels of public service demand. For example,

the EIS for the Navy OTC Revitalization Project determined that the project would result in increased density

under several alternative options that would contribute to significant additional proposed growth in dwelling

units, population, jobs, and non-residential uses over the targets contained in the applicable community plan.

The project would require approximately 37 additional teachers, 11 new police officers, 9 additional

emergency personnel and five new library employees by 2050 to accommodate the estimated increase in

population from development. An additional 40.2 acres of parkland would be required to meet the city’s

population- based standard for parkland if the property were to transfer out of federal ownership.


The County of San Diego General Plan EIR identified significant impacts on public services and utilities

associated with the construction or expansion of police protection facilities, expansion of school facilities, and

library facilities. Regionally, cumulatively considerable impacts on public services and utilities would result

from implementation of the County of San Diego General Plan Update (County of San Diego 2011).

The SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy 2020-2045 analyzes impacts on

the SCAG region up to 2045 and found that even with implementation of identified mitigation measures,

significant impacts on public services would result due to the considerable effects to the cumulative staffing

level and response times of police, fire, and emergency services in Southern California; direct and cumulative

demand for school facilities; loss of open space and recreational lands; demand on existing recreational

facilities; and direct and cumulative demand for solid waste services in the SCAG region (SCAG 2020a). Thus,

regionally cumulatively considerable impacts on public services and utilities would result from

implementation of the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS.

Throughout Southern California, individual cities and counties have also adopted general plans that guide

growth and land use changes within their jurisdictions. Moreover, individual service providers, including cities,

counties, special districts, school districts, and utilities, that operate in the Southern California region have

adopted long-term plans that forecast the demand for services and identify specific facilities projects that will

be required to meet projected needs. Each individual service provider, including cities, counties, special

districts, school districts, and utilities, that has an adopted general plan or other long-term plan that forecasts

the demand for services and identifies projects that will be required to meet projected needs, is responsible for

conducting the appropriate environmental assessment, identifying impacts, and implementing mitigation

measures to reduce impacts when possible. Construction-related and operational impacts are typically reduced

through actions of the implementing agency, including adherence to existing regulations and BMPs, but are

considered significant because impact mitigation to less-than-significant levels for all projects cannot be

guaranteed.


2025


Plan and impact projections from adopted plans within the Southern California region are significant when

considered together, even if not independently significant. Impacts from construction and of expanded or new

facilities for public services, utilities, and recreational resources from the proposed Plan and adopted plans in

the Southern California region would be cumulatively significant in 2025. Because cumulative public services




and utilities impacts throughout the Southern California region by 2025 would be significant, and because the

proposed Plan’s incremental impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental public services and

utilities impacts are also cumulatively considerable, with the exception of impacts related to provision of new

or expanded solid waste facilities (Impact C-PS-1, Impact C-U-1, and Impact C-REC-1).

As described in Section 4.15, there is sufficient landfill capacity in the region to accommodate forecasted

regional growth at least through 2030. As a result, the proposed Plan would not generate solid waste at a level

that would require new or expanded solid waste disposal facilities. The State of California continues to pass

legislation in support of additional recycling requirements with an emphasis on increasing organic material

diversion and developing the necessary organics processing infrastructure. While cumulative demand in the

Southern California region for solid waste disposal would increase by 2025, there is sufficient capacity for solid

waste disposal in the San Diego region through 2025. Therefore, the cumulative solid waste impact is not

significant, and the proposed Plan’s less-than-significant impacts related to solid waste disposal are not

cumulatively considerable in 2025.

2035

As described above, impacts from construction of expanded or new facilities for public services and utilities

from the proposed Plan and adopted plans in the Southern California region would be cumulatively significant

in 2035. Because cumulative public services and utilities impacts, including solid waste, and recreational

resources throughout the Southern California region by 2035 would be significant, and because the proposed

Plan’s incremental impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental public services and utilities impacts

are also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-PS-1, Impact C-U-1, and Impact C-REC-1).

2050

While many regional plans or projection impacts do not extend until the year 2050, public service and utility

impacts, similar in nature to those identified for earlier years would likely persist and also occur in 2050. As

described above, impacts from construction and of expanded or new facilities for public services, utilities, and

recreational resources from the proposed Plan and adopted plans in the Southern California, including solid

waste, would be cumulatively significant in 2050. Because cumulative public services and utilities impacts

throughout the Southern California region by 2050 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s

incremental impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental public services and utilities impacts are

also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-PS-1, Impact C-U-1, and Impact C-REC-1).

Mitigation Measures

C-PS-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO PUBLIC SERVICES

C-U-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO UTILITIES

C-REC-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO RECREATIONAL RESOURCES

Mitigation measures to reduce impacts associated with public services and utilities as identified in Section 4.15

would be applicable to cumulative impacts as well.




Section 4.15 includes mitigation measures PS-1, REC-1, U-1a, and U-1b, which call for jurisdictions with

responsibility for construction of public facilities, recreation facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, or storm

water facilities to apply mitigation measures to avoid or reduce significant environmental impacts associated

with the construction or expansion of such facilities. Section 4.15 also references mitigation measure WS-1a

from Section 4.17 regarding the reduction of water use for construction and operation of projects to conserve

water. However, it cannot be guaranteed that all future project-level impacts can be mitigated to a less-than-

significant level.

Mitigation measure U-2a calls for the reduction of impacts from construction or expansion of solid waste

facilities, and mitigation measures U-2b and U-2c would reduce solid waste volumes that would require

accommodation in regional landfills through the diversion of construction waste from transportation network

improvement projects or other development projects and the implementation of green building waste

management measures. However, it cannot be guaranteed that all future project-level impacts can be mitigated

to a less-than-significant level.

Similarly, the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR included mitigation measures to reduce impacts on public

services, such as coordination with emergency service providers, avoidance and conservation of recreation and

open space areas, patterns of urban development and land use that reduce costs on infrastructure and make

better use of existing facilities green building measures, source reduction and recycling for construction

projects, and waste management strategies. However, even with the implementation of mitigation measures,

the EIR concluded that significant and unavoidable public service impacts would result.

Based on the above analysis, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to cumulative public services and

utilities impacts in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain significant and cumulatively considerable post-

mitigation.

5.2.16 TRANSPORTATION

C-TRA-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS TO

TRANSPORTATION

The geographic scope for the transportation cumulative analysis is the Southern California and northern Baja

region. Urban development and transportation systems are not bound by jurisdictional boundaries as

movement within, through, and beyond the region is necessary for commuters, personal travel, and goods

movement. Thus, it is important to consider both the Southern California region as well as the connection with

northern Baja California. 1

A hybrid approach for the cumulative analysis of transportation allows for an overarching discussion of

regional impacts associated with general patterns of regional urbanization, growth, and land use change and

how the transportation network both influences, and is affected by, those regional development patterns.

Discussion of specific large-scale existing and probable future projects will also allow for consideration of

individual projects with known impacts on traffic and transportation.

Cumulative impacts related to transportation would occur if future operating conditions of the regional

transportation system, including the SANDAG, SCAG, and northern Baja regions, conflict with a program, plan,

1 It should be noted that the SANDAG model only calculates VMT within the San Diego region.




ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system; conflict with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 by not

achieving the substantial VMT reductions needed to help achieve statewide GHG reduction goals; substantially

increase hazards due to design features; or result in loss of parking that causes significant adverse

environmental impacts not evaluated elsewhere in the EIR.

This cumulative impact assessment relies on the impact analysis within this EIR for the proposed Plan; SCAG

2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR (SCAG 2020); SCAG 2021 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (SCAG

2021); San Diego County Regional Airport Authority 2008 Airport Master Plan, San Diego International Airport

and associated EIR (SDCRAA 2008); SDCRAA Aviation Activity Forecast (SDCRAA 2019); SDCRAA Regional

Aviation Strategic Plan Update (SDCRAA 2011b); Border 2025 Program, Master Action Plan for California-Baja

California (EPA 2013); California-Baja California Border Master Plan (Caltrans 2008); and 2034 Tijuana,

Tecate, and Playas de Rosarito Metropolitan Strategic Plan (IMPLAN 2013).


Implementation of regional growth and land use change as well as transportation network improvements

associated with the proposed Plan would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the

circulation system in 2025, 2035, or 2050. As documented in Section 4.16, the proposed Plan would increase

multi-modal options, including bicycle, pedestrian, and transit trips within the region, in all years, while

reducing vehicle trips, which would be consistent with the policies outlined in the 2019 Federal RTP. In

addition, the proposed Plan would not result in hazardous design features because transportation network

improvements would be designed in accordance with existing standards. Nor would the proposed Plan result

in loss of parking that causes significant adverse environmental impacts not evaluated elsewhere in the EIR .

These impacts would be less than significant in 2025, 2035, and 2050 (Impacts TRA-1, TRA-3, and TRA-4).

However, while implementation of the proposed Plan would result in a decrease in the region’s VMT per capita,

it will not be enough to achieve the state’s VMT reduction goal of 14.3 percent below baseline year 2016

conditions. Additionally, the proposed project would result in substantial increase in the overall VMT generated

by the region. Therefore, this would result in a significant impact in 2025, 2035 and 2050 conditions (Impact

TRA-2).


Related infrastructure projects, such as the HST, would result in potentially significant transportation impacts.

The environmental document for the HST project found that the project would have a positive effect when

viewed on a system-wide basis, particularly by reducing traffic on highways and around airports to the extent

that intercity trips are diverted to the train system and by eliminating delays at existing at-grade crossings

where the train system would provide grade separation. However, localized traffic conditions around some

HST system stations would experience a decrease in level of service and some added delays, and transit lines

serving the stations areas would experience increases in passengers during peak hours.

The Airport Development Plan would include improvements at SDIA in order to continue to accommodate the

approximately 1.82 million passengers that travel through SDIA each year. Improvements would include

replacement of the existing Terminal 1, modifications to Terminal 2, a new administration building, and a new

airport access roadway with new bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. The recirculated EIR for the Airport

Development Plan concluded that implementation of the plan would result in significant and unavoidable

traffic impacts (SDCRAA 2019).




Recent cross-border and POE projects have been completed along the U.S./Mexico border including the San

Diego-Tijuana Airport Cross Border Facility, which opened in 2015, and the San Ysidro Port of Entry Expansion

Project, the last phase of which opened in December 2019. The Cross Border Facility project involved creation

of a POE limited to pedestrian toll-paying airline passengers, avoiding and reducing delays at the San Ysidro

and Otay Mesa POEs. The EIR for this project found that project’s contribution to significant buildout

transportation/circulation impacts would be cumulatively considerable and would remain significant after

implementation of the identified mitigation (City of San Diego 2011). The San Ysidro Expansion Project that

would provide additional pedestrian and vehicle lanes and capacity through the POE to reduce traffic delays.


The EIR prepared for the 2020-2045 SCAG RTP/SCS identified a significant and unavoidable impact regarding

conflicts or inconsistencies with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) due to the potential to increase total daily

VMT in 2045. The EIR also found a significant cumulative impact resulting from implementation of the 2020-

2045 SCAG RTP/SCS to a cumulatively considerable amount of transportation impacts, such as VMT, in areas

outside of the SCAG region (SCAG 2020). The SCAG 2021 FTIP is prepared to implement projects and programs

listed in the RTP and is developed in compliance with state and federal requirements (SCAG 2021).

The 2008 Airport Master Plan, San Diego International Airport EIR identified that all traffic-related impacts

related to implementation of the Airport Master Plan would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.

However, the SDCRAA lacks the legal authority to implement the identified mitigation measures as the roadway

segments, intersections, and freeway ramps are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other agencies;

thus, if the agencies do not implement the measures identified in the EIR, the traffic impacts would remain

significant. The EIR analyzed parking supply and did not identify significant parking impacts related to

implementation of the plan or alternatives (SDCRAA 2008).

The SDCRAA Aviation Activity Forecast Update updated the 2012 forecasts for current and future capacity of

the County’s existing single runway and projected passenger traffic, aircraft operations, cargo activity, general

aviation, and military operations through the year 2050 (SDCRAA 2019). The updated forecasts were prepared

to analyze the factors behind the faster than forecast growth than what was anticipated in the 2012 forecasts.

The 2012 forecasts found that, by 2021 through 2035, runway congestion will not allow further growth and

that the single runway does not have enough capacity to handle the forecasted growth in aircraft operations;

the airport will experience a cumulative loss of at least five million to as many as 31 million passengers over

the forecast period (SDCRAA 2004). The RASP was prepared by SDCRAA to assess the long-range capabilities

of all public-use airports in the county with the goal of improving the performance of the regional airport

system (SDCAA 2011).

The Border 2025 Program, Master Action Plan for California-Baja California includes objectives to reduce air

emissions with one action to reduce vehicle emissions in the border region by establishing or strengthening

programs that reduce the number of vehicles that do not comply with vehicle emissions standards (EPA 2021).

In addition, the 2034 Tijuana, Tecate, and Playas de Rosarito Metropolitan Strategic Plan states that a critical

issue for the Baja region is the progressive deterioration of the quality of air associated with the number of

vehicles and no provision of sustainable transportation (IMPLAN 2013). While there is no associated

environmental documentation for these plans, the actions to improve air quality through better traffic

operations and opportunities would benefit regional border transportation issues.

According to the California-Baja California Border Master Plan, approximately 16.6 million northbound

pedestrian crossings and more than 30 million northbound privately owned vehicle crossings in 2015.




Projections for the year 2040 estimate a growth of approximately 68 percent for northbound crossings and the

Master Plan addresses concerns and benefits related to border planning. The Master Plan does not have

associated environmental analysis documents. The Master Plan concludes that the expansion of residents in

the border region will increase cross-border travel demand and continue to add pressure to the POE facilities

and connecting roads. Given the current and projected travel demand at the existing POEs, improving the

capacity and operations of the current infrastructure is critical to decrease traffic congestion and delays,

facilitate international trade, and improve the quality of life for residents in the border region (Caltrans 2021).


2025

As described in Section 4.16, implementation of the proposed Plan in 2025 would result in a significant impact

because of an increase in daily VMT within the San Diego region and because the proposed Plan would only

achieve a decrease in VMT per capita of 7.2 percent below 2016 conditions, which falls short of the 14.3

reduction CARB estimates will be needed to achieve 2050 state climate goals. Other transportation-related

impacts would be less than significant. As detailed in the sections above, there are forecasted adverse direct

and cumulative traffic and transportation impacts that would result with the implementation of regional plans

and related projects. For example, the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR identified a significant cumulative impact

resulting from a considerable contribution to impacts, such as VMT, in areas outside of the SCAG region (SCAG

2020). Therefore, cumulative transportation impacts throughout the Southern California and northern Baja

region by 2025 would be significant due to implementation of regional plans and related projects, and the

proposed Plan’s contribution to VMT impacts would be cumulatively considerable (Impact C-TRA-1) .

2035


because of increased total annual VMT and the regional VMT per capita would not be reduced to the levels that

are required to meet the state’s GHG reduction goals. As detailed in the sections above, there are forecasted

adverse direct and cumulative traffic and transportation impacts such as VMT that would result with the

anticipated implementation of regional plans and related projects including the 2020-2045 SCAG RTP/SCS.

Because implementation of regional growth and land use change as well as transportation network

improvements associated with the proposed Plan would not achieve the substantial VMT reductions needed to

help achieve statewide GHG reduction goals and would result in a significant cumulative impact, in combination

with other cumulative traffic impacts occurring throughout the region, the traffic impact of increased total

annual miles traveled is cumulatively considerable in 2035 (Impact C-TRA-1).

2050


because of increased total annual VMT and the regional VMT per capita would not be reduced to the levels that

are required to meet the state’s GHG reduction goals. As detailed in the sections above, there are forecasted

adverse direct and cumulative traffic and transportation impacts such as VMT that would result with the

anticipated implementation of regional plans and related projects including the 2020-2045 SCAG RTP/SCS,

(whose VMT effects would extend into 2050).

Because implementation of regional growth and land use change as well as transportation network

improvements associated with the proposed Plan would not achieve the substantial VMT reductions needed to




help achieve statewide GHG reduction goals and would result in a significant cumulative impact, in combination

with other cumulative traffic impacts occurring throughout the region, the traffic impact of increased total

annual miles traveled is cumulatively considerable in 2050 (Impact C-TRA-1). .

Mitigation Measures

C-TRA-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS TO

TRANSPORTATION

As detailed in Section 4.16, many features currently included in the proposed Plan (e.g., the SCS, increased

transit and active transportation investments) have the effect of reducing total annual VMT that might not

otherwise occur. Mitigation measure TRA-2 would further reduce total VMT through implementation of

transportation demand management strategies, reducing parking minimums, implementing additional active

transportation facilities not identified in the proposed Plan (i.e., complete street investments and bicycle and

pedestrian facilities), and implementation of road diet and traffic calming measures. In addition, GHG

mitigation measures GHG-5a, GHG-5d, and GHG-5f include additional feasible VMT reduction measures not

included in the proposed Plan that SANDAG would or other agencies can and should implement.

However, these mitigation measures would not reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Based on the

above analysis and lack of further feasible mitigation, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to

cumulative transportation impacts in years 2020, 2035, and 2050 would remain significant and cumulatively

considerable post-mitigation.

5.2.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

C-TCR-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS TO

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

The area of geographic consideration for cumulative impacts on tribal cultural resources is the Southern

California and northern Baja California region. Because local and regional settlement patterns are closely

linked, it is important to evaluate the loss of tribal cultural resources across this entire geographic area to

adequately consider how the loss of resources would impact the understanding of the closely interrelated

prehistoric and historic context. A projection approach for cumulative analysis of tribal cultural resources

allows for an overarching discussion of regional loss of interrelated tribal cultural resources associated with

general patterns of regional urbanization, growth, and land use changes. The cumulative impact is the

combination of the impacts of the proposed Plan and impact projections in adopted planning documents.

Significant cumulative impacts related to tribal cultural resources would occur if cumulatively there would be

a substantial increase in impacts with regard to the significance of tribal cultural resources.


Plan, SCAG’s Connect SoCal (2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy EIR

(SCAG 2020) for the Southern California region, the County of San Diego General Plan Update EIR (County of

San Diego 2011), and the California-Baja California 2021 Border Master Plan (Caltrans 2021). Many local

jurisdictions provide guidance and protective measures for tribal cultural resources in their general plans and

other local planning documents. There are generally no regional plans pertaining to such resources for the

northern Baja California region. The California-Baja California Border Master Plan is a binational

comprehensive approach to coordinate planning and delivery of projects at land POEs and transportation

infrastructure serving those POEs in the California-Baja California region. The Master Plan does not have an




associated environmental analysis documents and no detailed analysis of cultural resource impacts was

conducted for this Master Plan (Caltrans 2021).


Areas in the San Diego region are known to have a high potential for tribal cultural resources. Implementation

of the proposed Plan would result in the construction of development projects and transportation network

improvements that would result in a wide range of construction and ground-disturbing activities, such as

excavation, grading, and clearing, which remove and/or disturb the upper layer of soils. Since tribal cultural

resources have been found within inches of the ground surface in some areas of the San Diego region, in some

locations these ground-disturbing activities would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a

tribal cultural resource. Implementation of the proposed Plan would necessitate construction activities that in

some locations would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource

through the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of a resource or its immediate

surroundings such that the significance of a tribal cultural resource would be materially impaired. This would

occur within each horizon year analyzed (2025, 2035, and 2050). Therefore, impacts related to a substantial

adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource would be significant (Impact TCR-1).



Development Plan, HST, and City of San Diego Pure Water North City, would result in impacts related to

destruction or alteration of tribal cultural resources. Other land development and infrastructure projects

throughout the region, such as transportation infrastructure, energy generation and transmission corridors,

and commercial and residential land development would also result in impacts if these projects occur in areas

containing significant tribal cultural resources.


guideways, stations, and other features that may result in destruction or alteration of tribal cultural resources,

referred to in the program EIR/EIR as traditional cultural properties (HSRA 2005). The EIR/EIS prepared for

the HST project determined that the project would result in significant cumulative impacts on traditional

cultural properties. The EIR for the SDIA Airport Development Plan did not identify significant impacts to tribal

cultural resources (SDCRAA 2019). The Navy Old Town Campus Revitalization Project would result in impacts,

to tribal cultural resources however, impacts would be mitigated to a level of less than significant respect.

Impacts would similarly be cumulatively considerable, if these projects occur in close proximity to one another.

The City of San Diego Pure Water North City Project did not identify cumulatively considerable impacts to tribal

cultural resources, which are referred to in the EIR as locations of “religious or sacred use”.


Implementation of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to

adverse changes in the significance of tribal cultural resources. In addition, the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS’s influence

on growth would contribute to regionally significant impacts on tribal cultural resources and be cumulatively

considerable (SCAG 2020). The EIR prepared for the County of San Diego General Plan Update did not explicitly

analyze impacts on tribal cultural resources; however, the EIR considers impacts on tribal archaeological

resources and identifies mitigation consistent with the requirement of SB 18 related to regional coordination

and consultation with local tribal governments. The California-Baja California Border Master Plan does not

provide analysis of impacts on cultural resources; however, projects included in the Master Plan could have




adverse impacts on cultural or paleontological resources due to ground disturbance necessary for construction

of infrastructure.


2025


related projects, and impact projections from adopted plans within the Southern California and northern Baja

region are significant when considered together, even if not independently significant. As described above,

implementation of the proposed Plan and other regional plans would result in ground-disturbing activities that

would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. California projects

are required to adhere to federal, state and local regulations, as described in Section 4.5; however, cumulative

growth development located in Mexico would not be subject to compliance with such regulations. Additionally,

even with regulations in place, individual tribal cultural resources could still be impacted or degraded from

demolition, destruction, alteration, or structural relocation as a result of new private or public development or

redevelopment allowable under the proposed plan or other adopted regional plans. Therefore, cumulative

impacts on tribal cultural resources would be significant. Because the proposed Plan’s impacts on tribal cultural

resources are significant, they are also cumulatively considerable in 2025 (Impact C-TCR-1).

2035

The cumulative analysis presented above for the horizon year of 2025 would be applicable to year 2035, and

significant cumulative impacts on tribal cultural resources would occur. By 2035, increases in regional growth

and land use change, and the number of transportation network improvements implemented over those that

occurred by 2025 would result in additional adverse impacts related to changes in the significance of a tribal

cultural resource. As described in the 2025 analysis, cumulative impacts on tribal cultural resources would be

significant because there would be cumulative adverse changes in the significance of those resources due to

the proposed Plan, and other regional plans, and development located in northern Baja California. Because

cumulative tribal cultural resource impacts throughout the Southern California and northern Baja region by

2035 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts are significant, the proposed

Plan’s incremental tribal cultural resource impacts are also cumulatively considerable (Impact C-TCR-1).

2050

The cumulative analysis presented above for the horizon years of 2025 and 2035 would be applicable to year

2050, and significant cumulative impacts on tribal cultural resources would occur. By 2050, increases in

regional growth and land use change, and the number of transportation network improvements implemented

over those that occurred by 2025 and 2035 would result in adverse impacts related to changes in the

significance of a tribal cultural resource.

As described in the 2025 analysis, cumulative impacts on tribal cultural resources would be significant because

there would be cumulative adverse changes in the significance of those resources due to the proposed Plan,

and other regional plans, and development located in northern Baja California. Because the proposed Plan’s

impacts on tribal cultural resources are significant, they are also cumulatively considerable in 2050 (Impact C-

TCR-1).




Mitigation Measures

C-TCR-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS TO

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

Mitigation measures to reduce impacts on tribal cultural resources due to implementation of the proposed Plan

as identified in Section 4.17 would be applicable to cumulative impacts as well.

Mitigation measures TCR-1a and TCR-1b are measures to avoid or substantially reduce adverse changes in the

significance of a cultural resource, and protect cultural resources. These mitigation measures also require the

implementation of monitoring and data recovery programs during construction. These mitigation measures

would be included in project-level planning, design, and CEQA reviews. Implementation of these mitigation

measures would not reduce impacts that would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal

cultural resource to less than significant because it cannot be guaranteed that all future project-level impacts

can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures TCR-1a and TCR-1b would not reduce

the proposed Plan’s incremental impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental

contributions to cumulative tribal cultural resources impacts in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain


5.2.18 WATER SUPPLY

C-WS-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS TO

WATER SUPPLY

The geographic scope for the water supply cumulative analysis is the state of California, the Lower Colorado

River Basin, and northern Baja California. The large geographic scope is appropriate because regional growth

and land use change, transportation system needs, and the resulting water demand can influence water supply

reliability across the region as a whole, as development and water supplies are not strictly characterized by

jurisdictional boundaries.

The projection approach for the cumulative analysis of water supply is used. A projection approach allows for

an overarching discussion of regional impacts associated with water supply if existing water supplies and

facilities were not adequate for projected regional demand or if general patterns of regional urbanization,

growth, and land use changes and infrastructure development would result in the need for new or expanded

water treatment and distribution facilities.

The plans and studies relied on and considered for the cumulative analysis include the SCAG 2020–2045

RTP/SCS and its EIR (SCAG 2020a; 2020b), the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), 2013 Regional

Water Facilities Optimization and Master Plan Update (SDCWA 2014), Water Supply for Baja California:

Economic – Engineering Analysis for Agricultural, Environmental and Urban Demands (Medellin-Azuara et al.

2009), California Water Action Plan (California Natural Resources Agency 2014), California Water Plan Update

2013 (California Department of Water Resources 2013), SDCWA’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan

(SDCWA 2021), Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s 2020 Regional Urban Water Management

Plan (Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 2021), Municipal Water District of Orange County’s

(MWDOC) Draft 2020 Regional Urban Water Management Plan (Municipal Water District of Orange County

2021), Imperial Irrigation District’s 2012 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IID 2012), 2034

Tijuana, Tecate, and Playas de Rosarito Metropolitan Strategic Plan (IMPLAN 2013), Colorado River Basin

Water Supply and Demand Study (Bureau of Reclamation 2012), and Lower Colorado River Interim Shortage




Criteria and associated EIS (Bureau of Reclamation 2007). While many of these documents do not have

accompanying environmental analysis, they provide valuable information regarding the current and future

status of water supply throughout the cumulative region.

Within the geographic scope of the analysis are three groundwater basins designated by the state as medium

priority and one basin designated as high priority pursuant to the SGMA. Preparation of GSPs for the medium-

priority basins to allow future maintenance of a sustainable yield from these basins is underway should be

completed by 2022. A GSP has been prepared for the high-priority basin, the Borrego Valley Groundwater

Subbasin, by the Borrego Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency (BVGSA). The Borrego Springs GSP

establishes a sustainability goal to halt the overdraft condition in the Subbasin by bringing the groundwater

demand in line with a sustainable yield of 5,700 acre-feet per year by 2040 (BVGSA 2019). A Settlement

Agreement to adjudicate groundwater rights in a manner consistent with the GSP was approved on April 8,

2021 (see Borrego Water District v. All Persons who Claim a Right to Extract Groundwater in the Borrego Valley

Groundwater Subbasin No. 7.024-01) [Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange 2021].

The County of San Diego in the most recent General Plan Update (County of San Diego 2011) examined

groundwater basins and fractured rock aquifers across the County to determine which were being exploited in

an unsustainable manner as evidenced by insufficient aquifer recovery.

Significant cumulative impacts related to water supply would occur if existing water supplies and facilities were

not adequate to serve cumulative growth such that new or expanded water supplies or entitlements would be

required, if cumulative growth would impact groundwater resources in a manner that would hinder

sustainable use, or if cumulative growth and infrastructure development resulted in construction of new or

expanded water facilities that would cause significant environmental impacts.


Reasonably foreseeable existing and future regional water supplies would be adequate to meet regional water

demands associated with growth and land use change and transportation network improvements in 2025 and

2035. Beyond 2045, however, adequate water supplies to meet regional needs cannot be confirmed. This

uncertainty means that there may be insufficient regional water supplies in 2050, resulting in a significant

impact (Impact WS-1). Also, there would be localized significant impacts because of regional development and

land use changes within the boundaries of groundwater basins that are currently being pumped at

unsustainable levels. Proposed Plan impacts associated with groundwater water supplies in 2025, 2035, and

2050 are significant. (Impact WS-2).

Also, in 2025, 2035, and 2050, forecasted growth and land use change and implementation of transportation

network improvements would require construction of new water facilities or the expansion of existing

facilities; impacts of constructing these facilities would be significant (Impact WS-3).


While a majority of the documents and plans available for cumulative analysis do not have associated

environmental analysis, they do provide anticipated water supply demand for the region and consider the

adequacy of their existing supplies and plans for future supplies to meet future needs. These regional plans also

offer resource management strategies and objectives for ensuring future water supply such as reduce water

demand, improve operational efficiencies, increase and diversify water supply, and provide resource

stewardship. Due to current drought conditions throughout the state of California, many water districts and




other water suppliers have implemented a variety of drought responses that could influence the availability of

water supplies and water deliveries as previously anticipated in local and regional plans.

The SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS EIR (SCAG 2020b) found that the 2020-2045 RTP’s influence on growth would

contribute to an increased demand for water supply and its associated infrastructure. The EIR also identified

the potential of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS to contribute to cumulatively considerable demand on water

resources. Further, the increased demand resulting from the proposed Plan’s influence on growth could only

be even partially mitigated via measures beyond the purview of SCAG to implement, meaning that potentially

significant water supply impacts would result.

As described in a paper titled, Water Supply for Baja California: Economic – Engineering Analysis for

Agricultural, Environmental and Urban Demands, agricultural operations and population growth in California-

Baja California has placed pressure on natural resources, particularly water supply. It is of significant concern

to the California-Baja California border, where 50 percent of the entire U.S./Mexico border population lives.

The conditions of northern Baja region of arid climate, prominent agriculture, fast-growing border cities, and

water-sensitive ecosystems indicate that future water supplies will be a problem (Medellin-Azuara et al. 2009).

SDCWA’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan reports that, for normal years through 2045, no water supply

shortages would occur if supplies are developed as planned. Under the parameters assumed in the multiple

dry-year analysis no shortages would be experienced. Diversified supplies, consisting of water transfer

agreements, local surface water, desalination, and entitlements to MWD supplies assure adequate water even

during drought cycles through 2045. After 2045 there are no projections (SDCWA 2021).

The County General Plan Update EIR determined that groundwater basins and fractured rock aquifers in the

County were currently being pumped at levels that resulted in insufficient water level recovery. Such use is

unsustainable over time and is a significant impact to the groundwater resources.

The focus of the SDCWA’s 2013 Regional Water Facilities Optimization and Master Plan was to optimize existing

infrastructure and maintain the flexibility to adjust to a range of future regional planning outcomes through

2035. The update continued to find that the existing aqueduct system is fully capable of meeting regional

demands through the mid-2020s and under normal and wet weather patterns, there is a very low occurrence

of supply-demand gaps through 2035. However, during multiple dry-year weather patterns, the 2013 Regional

Water Facilities Optimization and Master Plan Update identified that supply-demands gaps will likely occur

(SDCWA 2014).

Metropolitan’s 2020 Regional Urban Water Management Plan reports that Metropolitan has supply capabilities

that would be sufficient to meet projected demands from 2020 through 2045 under the single dry-year and

multiple dry-year conditions (2021). There are no projections post-2045.

The MWDOC Draft 2020 Regional Urban Water Management Plan (MWDOC 2021) concludes that the MWDOC

service area (the region served by MWDOC is in Orange County and includes 26 cities and water districts) will

have sufficient existing and planned supplies to meet full service demands under every water-year hydrologic

scenario through 2045 by depending on MWD deliveries to compensate for any local shortfalls. The plan also

discusses potential sources of water supply that are being investigated to diversify the region’s water supply

portfolio, such as water transfers and exchange and ocean water desalination (MWDOC 2021).

IID’s 2012 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan states that the Imperial Region is faced with significant

water resources challenges, most of which relate to the availability of imported water from the Colorado River.




System and on-farm efficiency conservation measures have been formulated to enable IID to meet the

reduction requirement of net annual consumptive use of Colorado River water by 408,000 acre-feet by 2026.

These measures are designed to maintain historic levels of agricultural productivity and MCI water supplies;

however, when forecasted renewable energy and other demands are added to the future demand, the historic

amount would no longer be sufficient (IID 2012).

The Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study found that the Colorado River Basin faces a range

of potential future imbalances between supply and demand and states that addressing such imbalances will

require diligent planning and cannot be resolved through any single approach or option. Instead, an approach

that applies a wide variety of ideas at local, state, regional, and portfolio exploration demonstrated that

implementation of a broad range of options can reduce Basin resource vulnerability and improve the system’s

resiliency to dry hydrologic conditions while meeting increasing demands in the Basin and adjacent areas

receiving Colorado River water (Bureau of Reclamation 2012).

The 2034 Tijuana, Tecate, and Playas de Rosarito Metropolitan Strategic Plan lists the low water availability in

the region as a critical environmental issue, which is a limiting factor for future development. The plan states

that water demand in 2025 will be greater than 80 percent of the available water reserves. Strategies for

improvement listed in the plan include promote investment to ensure capacity of reuse and infiltration of

treated water and install sea water desalination plants (IMPLAN 2013).

The Lower Colorado River Interim Shortage Criteria and associated EIS (Bureau of Reclamation 2007)

represent a plan to share water supply shortages among Lower Colorado River water users, including SDCWA.

The EIS prepared for the interim shortage criteria projects Lower Colorado River water supply and demand

conditions through 2050. It also analyzes and considers trade-offs between the frequency and magnitude of

shortages, and describes potential effects on water shortage in Lake Powell and Lake Mead, and on water

supplies, power production, recreation, and other environmental resources. Ongoing drought conditions and

the potential for water supply shortages prompted discussions and negotiations focused on how to conserve

additional basin water supplies. After several years of negotiations, on March 19, 2019, Reclamation and the

Colorado River Basin states finalized Drought Contingency Plans (DCPs) for both the Upper Basin and the

Lower Basin. The Lower Basin DCP is designed to require Arizona, California, and Nevada to curtail deliveries

and thereby contribute additional water to Lake Mead storage at predetermined “trigger” elevations. It is also

designed to create additional flexibility to incentivize voluntary conservation of water to be stored in Lake

Mead, thereby increasing lake levels (Congressional Research Service 2021).

As described in many of the plans above, often there is an expectation that future water supply could be met

given certain parameters, such as proposed water supply projects are constructed and operational,

entitlements are fully granted, and water use reduction measures are successful. These factors are highly

uncertain, and in some cases such as rainfall and drought conditions, are uncontrollable by the water agencies,

districts, or suppliers.


2025


and impact projections from adopted plans within state of California, the Lower Colorado River Basin, and

northern Baja California region were significant when considered together, even if not independently

significant.




As described above, significant water supply impacts were not identified for proposed Plan growth and land

use change and transportation network improvements in 2025. However, the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS was

found to contribute to cumulatively considerable demand on water resources. While many of the regional water

supply planning documents anticipate being able to adequately meet future water demand in the near term,

their ability to do so is based on anticipated, but uncertain circumstances. Furthermore, a number of additional

indeterminate factors could affect future water supply, including meteorological conditions; climate change;

cost and use of energy; potential policy and permitting restrictions; endangered species protections; and

demographic unknowns. The combined cumulative impacts of these regional and statewide plans, coupled with

the uncertainties mentioned above, would be significant regarding increased demands on existing water

supplies such that they could be inadequate to serve future demands, and new or expanded water supplies or

entitlements would be needed by 2025.

Regional growth and land development would result in population increases on land overlying one of the three

groundwater basins requiring preparation of a GSP because of being identified as medium priority by DWR.

Regional growth and land development would also occur on land overlying groundwater basins identified by

the County (2011) as having insufficient storage. Regional growth on land overlying medium-priority

groundwater basins would also contribute to an existing aquifer overdraft. Groundwater impacts of regional

growth and land use change would cumulatively significant in the Year 2025.

Cumulative demand for water supply as a result of regional growth and land use change would likely

necessitate the need for new water treatment or distribution facilities or the expansion of existing facilities.

Construction of new or expanded facilities would cause short-term construction impacts that are typically

controllable through adherence to regulations and BMPs, as well as operational impacts. There is no assurance

the impacts from new or expanded water facilities would be less than significant for all projects. The SCAG

2020-2045 RTP/SCS was also found to contribute to cumulatively considerable demand on associated water

supply infrastructure. Thus, the cumulative impact related to construction of new or expanded water treatment

or distribution facilities would be significant in 2025.

Because cumulative water supply impacts throughout the state of California, the Lower Colorado River Basin,

and northern Baja region by 2025 would therefore be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental

water supply impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental water supply impacts are also

cumulatively considerable (Impact C-WS-1).

2035

The cumulative analysis presented above for year 2025 would be applicable to year 2035. While significant

water supply impacts were not identified for proposed Plan growth and land use change and transportation

network improvements in 2035, the combined cumulative water supply impacts of regional and statewide

plans, coupled with the uncertainties mentioned in the 2025 analysis, would be significant in 2035 regarding

available water supplies.

A decrease in population between 2026 and 2035 is forecast in the areas overlying the groundwater basins

designated as medium priority by DWR is forecasted. Nevertheless, growth would continue to occur on land

overlying other groundwater basins and fractured rock aquifers identified by the County of San Diego (2011)

as having insufficient storage. This continued growth is a significant cumulative impact to groundwater

sustainability.











and northern Baja region by 2035 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental water

supply impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental water supply impacts are also cumulatively

considerable in 2035 (Impact C-WS-1).

2050

The cumulative analysis presented above for years 2025 and 2035 would be applicable to year 2050. In

addition, water planning documents prepared by water agencies in the region have no projections for water

supplies after 2045. Significant water supply and facility impacts were identified for proposed Plan growth and

land use changes as well as transportation network improvements in 2050. The combined cumulative water

supply impacts of regional and statewide plans coupled with the uncertainties mentioned in the 2025 analysis,

would be significant in 2050 regarding increased water demands on existing supplies such that they would be

inadequate to serve future demands.

Regional growth and land use change between 2036 and 2050 would continue to occur on land overlying

groundwater basins and fractured rock aquifers identified by the County (2011) as having an insufficient level

of aquifer storage to ensure sustainability. Forecasted regional growth would increase the population of land

overlying two of the groundwater basins designated as medium priority by DWR. Growth between 2036 and

2050 would exacerbate current unsustainable condition characterizing these aquifers and would cause a

significant cumulative groundwater impact.








and northern Baja region by 2050 would therefore be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental

water supply impacts are significant, the proposed Plan’s incremental water supply impacts are also

cumulatively considerable (Impact C-WS-1).

Mitigation Measures

C-WS-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS TO

WATER SUPPLY

Mitigation measure WS-1a calls for implementation of water conservation measures for transportation

projects. Mitigation measure WS-1b calls for the implementation of water conservation measures as part of

land development projects. Mitigation measure WS-1c calls for verification of adequate water supply




availability to satisfy projected water demands. Implementation of mitigation measures WS-1a, WS-1b, and

WS-1c would not guarantee reduction of all proposed Plan impacts associated with the availability of water

supplies to a level of less than significant. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to the

cumulative water supply impacts in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-

mitigation.

To reduce environmental impacts resulting from land use changes and transportation facility development on

the sustainable yield of groundwater basins, mitigation measure WS-2 calls for the County of San Diego, cities,

and other local jurisdictions to ensure sustainable yield of groundwater basins during planning, design, and

project-level CEQA review of development projects. However, it cannot be guaranteed that all future project-

level impacts can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental

contributions to the cumulative impacts to the sustainability of groundwater resources in years 2025, 2035,

and 2050 would remain cumulatively considerable post-mitigation.

To reduce environmental impacts resulting from the construction of new or expanded water treatment of

distribution facilities, mitigation measure WS-3 calls for jurisdictions or agencies with responsibility for the

construction of new or expanded water treatment and conveyance facilities apply necessary mitigation

measures to reduce significant environmental impacts associated with these facilities during the CEQA review

process for individual facilities. However, it cannot be guaranteed that all future project-level impacts can be

mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s incremental contributions to the

cumulative impacts from new or expanded water facilities in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain


5.2.19 WILDFIRE

C-WF-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO WILDFIRE


region. Large-scale land use change and improvements to the transportation system influence the regional

development pattern, thereby altering the level of risk exposure to buildings, transportation facilities, and

people to the risks posed by wildfire. The most immediate indication of potential wildfire risk is the

projected location of new development, either structures or transportation facilities, in areas classified as

Very High Fire Severity Zones (VHFSZs). Post-fire slope instability poses a risk in the form of debris flows and

landslides. Wildfires pose a significant public health risk due to their air quality impacts.

A projection approach is used for the cumulative analysis of wildfire risk as growth, land use change, and

transportation network improvements across the region can result in the placement of structures and people

in VHFSZs and in areas adjacent to slopes posing risks after wildfires. The cumulative impact is the

combination of the impacts of the proposed Plan and similar impacts identified in adopted plans. Significant

cumulative impacts related to wildfire would occur if the proposed Plan and other planning documents would

induce substantial increases in structures and residents in areas with a high risk of wildfire or of post-fire

debris flows or slope failures. In addition, placement of development in areas characterized by high fire risk

increases the likelihood of wildfires and the resulting regional exposure to public health risk due to air quality

impacts.

This cumulative impact assessment considers and relies on the impact analysis within this EIR for the

proposed Plan, and EIR for the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP (SCAG 2020b), and the EIR for the most recent update of




the San Diego County General Plan (2011). Comparable information is not available for Baja California,

however a United Nations-sponsored assessment of natural disaster risk in Baja California indicated a

situation that, with respect to natural conditions, anticipated growth, and identified wildfire risk, is very

similar to conditions in Southern California (Global Risk Identification Program 2011).


The proposed Plan would result in significant wildfire risk impacts. Impacts associated with wildfire hazards

related to implementation of the proposed Plan are analyzed in Section 4.19. Development of transportation or

land development projects in wildfire-prone areas would cause an increase in population exposed to wildfire

risk as a result of development in VHFSZs, would expose people to post-fire risks associated with debris flows,

flash floods and landslides, and exacerbate exposure of those populations to pollutant concentrations from

wildfires, particularly populations living downwind of the fire. These impacts would be significant (Impacts

WF-1 through WF-3).


Potential development resulting from implementation of regional plans could occur in wildfire areas and could

result in additional impacts related to wildfire. SCAG’s 2020–2045 RTP/SCS (SCAG 2020a) covers all of the

other counties in Southern California, i.e., Los Angeles, Orange, Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino and

Ventura. The EIR for the SCAG RTP/SCS (SCAG 2020b) identified significant impacts related to wildfire risk,

concluding that development resulting from the plan would be responsible for “exposing occupants to wildfire

risks and pollutant concentrations from wildfire, and exposing people or structures to post-fire slope

instability. Wildfires pose a significant public health risk due to their air quality impacts.”

The County General Plan Update EIR was prepared prior to the amendment to the CEQA Guidelines requiring

the analysis of wildfire as a separate environmental issue. The EIR (County of San Diego 2011) did conclude in

the Public Services section, however, that “…the development of future land uses as designated in the proposed

General Plan Update would increase demand for fire protection services requiring the provision of new or

physically altered fire facilities, which would have the potential to result in adverse environmental impacts.

Therefore, the proposed project, in combination with the identified cumulative projects, would have the

potential to result in a significant cumulative impact associated with fire protection services.”


2025


and impact projections from the other adopted plan were significant when considered together, even if not

independently significant. It was concluded that the proposed Plan would result in significant impacts related

to wildfire risk. This impact determination was based on projected land development of approximately 6,655

acres of land classified as a VHFSZ. An additional 50 acres of land classified as VHFSZ would be developed with

transportation facilities. The potential need to extend electrical transmission and other infrastructure into

these fire-prone areas was identified as a significant impact, as were the post-fire risks in these posed by

potential debris flows, landslides, and drainage changes on nearby slopes. In addition, the exposure of

additional people and structures to risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, and including exposure

of harmful pollutant concentrations in the form of wildfire smoke, was identified as a significant impact The

EIR for the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (2020b) identified similar impacts for six additional counties to the north




and east of San Diego County. The County of San Diego General Plan Update EIR (2011) concluded that a

significant cumulative impact would result from the expanded fire services required by planned future growth.

While comparable analysis for Baja California is not available, the combination of similar landscape and rapid

demographic growth allows a similar conclusion.

Because cumulative wildfire impacts throughout Southern California, and likely in the northern Baja region by

2025 would be significant, and because the proposed Plan’s incremental wildfire impacts are significant, the

proposed Plan’s incremental wildfire impacts are also cumulatively considerable in 2025 (Impact C-WF-1).

2035




to wildfire risk. This impact determination was based on projected land development of approximately 1,737

acres of land classified as a VHFSZ. An additional 524 acres of land classified as VHFSZ would be developed

with transportation facilities. The potential need to extend electrical transmission infrastructure into these fire-

prone areas was identified as a significant impact, as were the post-fire risks in these posed by potential debris

flows, landslides, and drainage changes on nearby slopes. In addition, the exposure of additional people and

structures to risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, and including exposure of harmful pollutant

concentrations in the form of wildfire smoke, was identified as a significant impact. The EIR for the SCAG 2020-

2045 RTP/SCS (2020b) identified similar impacts for six additional counties to the north and east of San Diego

County. The County of San Diego General Plan Update EIR (2011) concluded that a significant cumulative

impact would result from the expanded fire services required by planned future growth. While comparable

analysis for Baja California is not available, the combination of similar landscape and rapid demographic

growth allows a similar conclusion.




2050




to wildfire risk. This impact determination was based on projected land development of approximately 172

acres of land classified as a VHFSZ. An additional 1041 acres of land classified as VHFSZ would be developed

with transportation facilities. The potential need to extend electrical transmission infrastructure into these fire-

prone areas was identified as a significant impact, as were the post-fire risks in these posed by potential debris

flows, landslides, and drainage changes on nearby slopes. In addition, the exposure of additional people and

structures to risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, and including exposure of harmful pollutant

concentrations in the form of wildfire smoke, was identified as a significant impact. The EIR for the SCAG 2020-

2045 RTP/SCS (2020b), whose wildfire effects extend through 2050, identified similar impacts for six

additional counties to the north and east of San Diego County. The County of San Diego General Plan Update

EIR (2011) concluded that a significant cumulative impact would result from the expanded fire services

required by planned future growth. While comparable analysis for Baja California is not available, the

combination of similar landscape and rapid demographic growth allows a similar conclusion.







Mitigation Measures

C-WF-1 MAKE A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTION TO ADVERSE EFFECTS

RELATED TO WILDFIRE.

Mitigation measure WF-1 is intended to reduce wildfire risk for development and transportation projects

during planning, design, and project-level CEQA review of projects in areas classified as VHFHSZs. SANDAG and

other transportation project sponsors would implement measures to reduce impacts from wildfires. Mitigation

measure WF-2 would require that during planning, design, and project-level CEQA review of transportation

network improvements or development projects located in SRAs or in LRAs classified as VHFHSZs, local

jurisdictions, and public service and utility providers would ensure that project sponsors implement measures

to reduce impacts from wildfire-associated infrastructure. Mitigation measure WF-3 would reduce post-fire

risks related to flooding, landslides, slope instability, or drainage changes resulting from development and

transportation projects. It would apply to planning, design, and project-level CEQA review of development

projects or transportation network improvement projects in areas classified as VHFHSZs. Local agencies would

ensure that project applicants work with local communities to implement measures to reduce post-fire

impacts.

Implementation of mitigation measures WF-1, WF-2 and WF-3 would not guarantee reduction of all proposed

Plan impacts associated with wildfire to a level of less than significant. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s

incremental contributions to the cumulative water supply impacts in years 2025, 2035, and 2050 would remain


5 cumulative impact analysis 5.1 cumulative impact …

Documents

CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS

Cumulative Impact Management: Cumulative Impact Indicators and Thresholds

Cumulative Weight: Impact on the Economy

CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS PRINCIPLES AND METHODS …ich.no/Opplastet/Dokumenter/Conference 2017/Documents/Small Hydro... · CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS PRINCIPLES AND METHODS

Cumulative Impact Assessment

Peace River Cumulative Impact Study

1 Cumulative Impact Management: Cumulative Impact Indicators and Thresholds Presented by: Salmo Consulting Inc. and AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd

144 Cumulative Impact Assessment and Management

chapter 25 cumulative impact assessment

#NHFWelfare The cumulative impact of welfare reform

Impact Assessment - Cumulative Jackson Proposals

Cumulative Impact Assessment · contents 1 introduction 1 1.1 overview 1 1.2 project description 1 1.3 objectives of the cia 5 1.4 cumulative impact approach 5 2 cumulative impact

BI SMP Cumulative Impact Analysis

Spatially variable trends in cumulative impact of human …€¦ · Web viewSupplementary Data 2. Average difference in impact scores for each stressor and for cumulative impact

Cumulative Impact Assessment Guidelines

The Impact of Cumulative Impact Factors - Eugene · PDF fileProceedings of the 8th IFSE Conference. Barcelona 1995 1 Impact of Cumulative Impact Factors EUGENE GARFIELD Chairman Emeritus,

Sample Guidelines: Cumulative Environmental Impact ... · ii Sample Guidelines: Cumulative Enviromental Impact Assessment for Hydropower Projects in Turkey List of Tables Table 4

Cisco Unified Communications Manager Engineering Special 5.1… · 2008. 8. 6. · Invalid Install: 5.1(3.4101-1) installed over 5.1(2.3000-2) Engineering Specials are cumulative,

Cumulative Environmental Impact Assessment Industry Guide · Environmental Cumulative Impact Assessment Industry Guide 7 1 Introduction Cumulative impact assessment (CIA) is an approach

The cumulative impact of regulation, taxes and a low … impact analysis on the Belgian banking sector | 1 An impact analysis on the Belgian banking sector | 1 The cumulative impact

Draft Cumulative Impact Assessment - Blackpool

Quantifying the Cumulative Impact of Change Orders

CUMULATIVE HYDROLOGIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT (CHIA) …This Cumulative Hydrologic Impact Assessment (CHIA) is a findings document. It assesses the impacts likely to occur within a cumulative

Cumulative Impact: Digital Ethnography of Environmental

CUMULATIVE IMPACT - nj.gov · CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction Findings 3 Defining Cumulative impacts Thresholds of Cumulative Impacts

CHAPTER 5 Cumulative Impacts€¦ · CalAm Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project 5-1 April 2015 Draft EIR CHAPTER 5 Cumulative Impacts Sections 5.1 Overview of Cumulative Impacts

5.0 CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT 5.1 CUMULATIVE ......Aera Energy LLC East Cat Canyon Oil Field Redevelopment Project - 5-3 - Table 5.1-1. Cumulative Development Summary Map Key Number County

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT APPENDIX L: … · ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT APPENDIX L: Cumulative Impacts Analysis ... An analysis of cumulative effects should include past,

Integrating Indicators of Cumulative Impact and

Socioeconomic, Cumulative Impact and Framework … · Socioeconomic, Cumulative Impact and Framework CEMP ... HAZID Hazard Identification HAZOP Hazards and Operability ... MVA Megavolt

Long Intl Cumulative Impact Claims

Norfolk Vanguard Offshore Wind Farm Cumulative Impact

Liwa Plastic Industries Complex Cumulative Impact ...orpic.om/UploadsAll/CIA.pdfLiwa Plastic Industries Complex Cumulative Impact Assessment Report ... Liwa Plastic Industries Complex

Cumulative Impact Management Policy

Good Practice Handbook Cumulative Impact Assessment and